Skip to main content
. 2021 Aug 26;2021(8):CD004122. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004122.pub5

Summary of findings 1. Clipping compared with no hair removal for participants undergoing surgery.

Clipping compared with no hair removal for participants undergoing surgery
Patient or population: people undergoing surgery
Setting: hospital
Intervention: clipping
Comparison: no hair removal
Outcomes Anticipated absolute effects* (95% CI) Relative effect
(95% CI) № of participants
(studies) Certainty of the evidence
(GRADE) Comments
Risk with no hair removal Risk with clipping
Surgical site infection (SSIs)
assessed with: proportion of SSIs
follow‐up: 4 weeks Study population RR 0.95
(0.65 to 1.39) 1733
(3 RCTs) ⊕⊕⊝⊝
Low 1 Pooled meta‐analysis suggests there may be little difference in SSIs when preoperative hair removal with clippers is compared with no hair removal.
60 per 1000 3 fewer SSIs per 1000
(21 fewer to 23 more)
Wound complications No data were reported for this outcome.
Length of stay No data were reported for this outcome.
Cost of care No data were reported for this outcome.
*The risk in the intervention group (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI).

CI: confidence interval; RCT: randomised controlled trial; RR: risk ratio
GRADE Working Group grades of evidenceHigh certainty: We are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect.
Moderate certainty: We are moderately confident in the effect estimate: the true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different.
Low certainty: Our confidence in the effect estimate is limited: the true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect.
Very low certainty: We have very little confidence in the effect estimate: the true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect.

1Downgraded two levels for very serious imprecision because of wide confidence intervals across the three included studies.