Applicability of the surgical site infection risk index to patients undergoing cardiac, neurologic and orthopedic surgery

Introduction: The surgical site infection risk index (SSIRI) includes three risk factors for surgical site infection (SSI): potential for surgical contamination, duration of surgery, and patient’s ASA score. A patient having a preoperative American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score of III, IV or IV; a surgery classified as either contaminated or dirty-infected; an operation with duration of surgery more than T hours, where T depends on the surgical procedure being performed are considered in risk of SSI. The SSIRI can be used as a method of postoperative surveillance. The aim of this study is to analyze the applicability of the SSIRI to patients undergoing cardiac, neurologic and orthopedic surgery.Methods: A retrospective cohort study including patients undergoing cardiac, neurological and orthopedic surgeries considered major, from January to December 2014, evaluated through review of medical charts of patients admitted to a university hospital in southern Brazil. Values of p <0.05 were considered significant.Results: A total of 761 patients were included in the study; of these, 122 (16%) developed SSI. The SSIRI did not demonstrate statistical significance to distinguish the patients most likely to develop SSI between the four levels of the ASA score. Black and brown patients, patients who underwent intraoperative blood transfusion, and patients who underwent surgical reintervention were more susceptible to SSI.Conclusions: The SSIRI could not be used as a method of postoperative surveillance for patients in the present study. The other risk factors found may serve as a guide to articulate SSI prevention strategies and, thus, minimize chances of development of serious infections.Keywords: Postoperative complications; infection; risk indexIntroduction: The surgical site infection risk index (SSIRI) includes three risk factors for surgical site infection (SSI): potential for surgical contamination, duration of surgery, and patient’s ASA score. A patient having a preoperative American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score of III, IV or IV; a surgery classified as either contaminated or dirty-infected; an operation with duration of surgery more than T hours, where T depends on the surgical procedure being performed are considered in risk of SSI. The SSIRI can be used as a method of postoperative surveillance. The aim of this study is to analyze the applicability of the SSIRI to patients undergoing cardiac, neurologic and orthopedic surgery.Methods: A retrospective cohort study including patients undergoing cardiac, neurological and orthopedic surgeries considered major, from January to December 2014, evaluated through review of medical charts of patients admitted to a university hospital in southern Brazil. Values of p <0.05 were considered significant.Results: A total of 761 patients were included in the study; of these, 122 (16%) developed SSI. The SSIRI did not demonstrate statistical significance to distinguish the patients most likely to develop SSI between the four levels of the ASA score. Black and brown patients, patients who underwent intraoperative blood transfusion, and patients who underwent surgical reintervention were more susceptible to SSI.Conclusions: The SSIRI could not be used as a method of postoperative surveillance for patients in the present study. The other risk factors found may serve as a guide to articulate SSI prevention strategies and, thus, minimize chances of development of serious infections.Keywords: Postoperative complications; infection; risk inde

Applicability of the surgical site infection risk index to patients undergoing cardiac, neurologic and orthopedic surgery

Introduction: The surgical site infection risk index (SSIRI) includes three risk factors for surgical site infection (SSI): potential for surgical contamination, duration of surgery, and patient’s ASA score. A patient having a preoperative American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score of III, IV or IV; a surgery classified as either contaminated or dirty-infected; an operation with duration of surgery more than T hours, where T depends on the surgical procedure being performed are considered in risk of SSI. The SSIRI can be used as a method of postoperative surveillance. The aim of this study is to analyze the applicability of the SSIRI to patients undergoing cardiac, neurologic and orthopedic surgery. Methods: A retrospective cohort study including patients undergoing cardiac, neurological and orthopedic surgeries considered major, from January to December 2014, evaluated through review of medical charts of patients admitted to a university hospital in southern Brazil. Values of p <0.05 were considered significant. Results: A total of 761 patients were included in the study; of these, 122 (16%) developed SSI. The SSIRI did not demonstrate statistical significance to distinguish the patients most likely to develop SSI between the four levels of the ASA score. Black and brown patients, patients who underwent intraoperative blood transfusion, and patients who underwent surgical reintervention were more susceptible to SSI. Conclusions: The SSIRI could not be used as a method of postoperative surveillance for patients in the present study. The other risk factors found may serve as a guide to articulate SSI prevention strategies and, thus, minimize chances of development of serious infections. Keywords: Postoperative complications; infection; risk inde

Evaluation of cephazolin use as surgical-site infection prophylaxis

Introdução: infecções cirúrgicas são o segundo tipo mais frequente de infecção relacionada à assistência de saúde e tem sua incidência reduzida com a administração de antibioticoprofilaxia cirúrgica. Métodos: foi realizado estudo transversal, de 01 de março a 30 de abril de 2010, observandose a adequação do uso da cefazolina na profilaxia cirúrgica. A adequação foi avaliada conforme: 1. O tempo da primeira dose, 2. A dose utilizada, 3. Doses adicionais durante a cirurgia e 4. O tempo de manutenção do antimicrobiano após o procedimento. Resultados: foram avaliadas 264 cirurgias com uso de cefazolina como antibioticoprofilaxia cirúrgica. Cirurgias limpas foram 85,6% da amostra, dessas 43,4% tinham implante de prótese. Todas as quatro etapas avaliadas estavam adequadas em 33,7% das cirurgias, e todas as etapas foram inadequadas em 2,3% das cirurgias. O tempo para a primeira dose estava correto em 66,3% dos procedimentos. Apenas um paciente teve administrada dose inadequada do antibiótico. Das cirurgias com mais de 3h de duração, em 46,5% foram realizadas doses adicionais da cefazolina. Quarenta e oito por cento dos pacientes receberam o antimicrobiano por mais de 24h. Em 6,1% destes pacientes foi feito o diagnóstico de infecção associada ao procedimento cirúrgico. Conclusão: há uma baixa taxa de adequação da profilaxia cirúrgica com cefazolina no hospital. É necessária uma padronização desta profilaxia, com a instituição de um protocolo assistencial visando uniformizar as condutas para a prevenção da infecção de sítio cirúrgico no HCPA.Aims: surgical site infections are the second most frequent cause of healthcare associated infections, and their incidence is reduced with the administration of antimicrobial prophylaxis. Methods: this cross-sectional study, conducted from March 1 to April 30, 2010, evaluated adequacy and timeliness of cefazolin administration as surgical prophylaxis. Adequacy parameters were: (1) time to first dose; (2) cefazolin dose infused; (3) additional dose during surgery; and (4) duration of antimicrobial therapy after surgery. Results: of a total of 264 surgeries evaluated, 85.6% were classified as clean, and prostheses were implanted in 43.4%. All steps of antimicrobial prophylaxis were adequate in 33.7% of the surgeries, and all steps were inadequate in 2.3%. Time to first dose was correct in 66.3% of the cases. Only one patient received an inadequate dose of the antimicrobial. Additional doses of cefazolin were administered in 46.5% of the surgeries that lasted more than 3 hours, and 48% of the patients received antimicrobial therapy for more than 24 hours. Surgical site infection was diagnosed in 6.1% of the patients. Conclusion: the rate of adequacy of surgical prophylaxis in the hospital was low. Standardized protocols and practices should be established to ensure adequate prevention of surgical site Infection in hospitals