Objective: To investigate the situation of prophylactic antibiotics for type I incision surgery during perioperative period before and after pharmaceutical intervention in our hospital, so as to provide references for rational clinical use. Methods: Using Rbase system, 713 cases of type I incision surgery from January 2017 to December 2019 were selected, including 347 cases before intervention (a control group) and 366 cases after intervention (an intervention group). The utilization rate, selection of variety, indications, course of administration, timing of administration and combination of prophylactic antibiotics were compared between the 2 groups. Results: After pharmaceutical intervention, the rationality of prophylactic antibiotics for type I incision surgery during perioperative period was significantly higher (72.1% vs 45.5%, P<0.001). The results of logistic regression indicated that the utilization rate of prophylactic antibiotics decreased from 55.6% to 47.8% after intervention; there was significant difference, also the type of surgery was significantly associated with the utilization rate (P<0.01). In terms of drug selection, indications of utilization, course of administration, timing of administration, and combination of prophylactic antibiotics, the rationality was significantly higher after intervention (81.1% vs 47.2%, P<0.001; 97.1% vs 92.2%, P<0.05; 95.4% vs 85.0%, P<0.01; 98.3% vs 93.8%, P<0.05; 98.9% vs 93.3%, P<0.01). In addition, there was no statistical significance in the use of systemic and local antibiotics between the 2 groups (P>0.05), and the rationality of variety replacement in the intervention group was improved compared with that in the control group (66.9% vs 60.1%), but there was no significant difference. Conclusion: The effect of pharmaceutical intervention is significant. Nevertheless, there are still unreasonable phenomena, and the management and education efforts should be further strengthened.