Table 2: Summary of the 6 studies included in the systematic review
AuthorDesignSettingInvestigationOutcomeLevel of evidence*
Biljan et al.,9 1993Multicentre randomized double-blinded crossover trial, prospectiveOutpatientComparison of contamination of bow ties v. neckties in obstetric/gynecologic practice, n = 15 physiciansNo difference in contamination by third day onward1a
Jadad scale score 3/5
Lopez et al.,10 2009Cross-sectional survey, case-controlOutpatientComparison of contamination of neckties v. front shirt pocket, n = 50 physicians (25 surgeons and 25 other physicians)Higher bacterial counts on neckties than on shirts3b
NOS score 7/9
Koh et al.,11 2009Cross-sectional survey, case-controlOutpatientComparison of MRSA on neckties of medical staff (n = 50) v. preclinical medical students (n = 50)Higher rates of Staphylococcus aureus and MRSA on physicians' neckties than on medical students' neckties3b
NOS score 7/9
Pisipati et al.,12 2009Case-control study, prospectiveOutpatientComparison of bacterial growth on neckties and pens worn by urological surgeons v. control specimens, n = 4Common environmental bacteria found3b
NOS score 7/9
Weber et al.,13 2012Case-control study, prospectiveOutpatientExamined effect of sleeve length and wearing of necktie on rate of transmission of bacteria from physician to simulated patient (mannequin), n = 1 physician in 4 different combinations of attire examining 5 patients per groupWearing unsecured tie resulted in greater transmission of bacteria; sleeve length did not affect transmission3b
NOS score 8/9
Dixon,14 2000Cross-sectional survey, case series, no control subjectsInpatientExamined type of bacteria on neckties of medical staff in intensive care unit, n = 55/5 coagulase-negative Staphylococcus: 3 S. citreus, 1 "Bacillus species"4

Note: MRSA = methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, NOS = Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

*Assessed with the use of the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine Level of Evidence criteria.6 The Jadad scale and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale were used to assess the quality of evidence.