Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Surgical Infectionsarrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
Surgical Infections
Article . 2017 . Peer-reviewed
License: Mary Ann Liebert TDM
Data sources: Crossref
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

Effect of Hand Antisepsis Agent Selection and Population Characteristics on Surgical Site Infection Pathogens

Authors: Brad S, Oriel; Qi, Chen; Kevin, Wong; Kamal M F, Itani;

Effect of Hand Antisepsis Agent Selection and Population Characteristics on Surgical Site Infection Pathogens

Abstract

Selection of a pre-operative hand antisepsis agent has not been studied in relation to surgical site infection (SSI) culture data. In our hospital, we introduced an alcohol-based hand rub (ABR) in 2012 as an alternative to traditional aqueous surgical scrubs (TSS). It was the goal of this study to review any effect of this implementation on SSI pathogen characteristics. In addition, we sought to compare our SSI culture data with available National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) data. We hypothesized that SSI pathogens and resistant isolates are affected by surgical hand antisepsis technique.Data collected prospectively between 2007 and 2014 were retrospectively analyzed for two time periods at the Veterans Affairs Boston Healthcare System (VABHS): Before ABR implementation (TSS group) and after (ABR group). Pathogen distribution and pathogenic isolate resistance profiles were compared for TSS and ABR, and similar comparisons, along with procedure-associated SSI comparisons, were made between VABHS and NHSN. All VABHS data were interpreted and categorized according to NHSN definitions.Compared with TSS (n = 4,051), ABR (n = 2,293) had a greater rate of Staphylococcus aureus (42.6% vs. 38.0%), Escherichia coli (12.8% vs. 9.9%), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (8.5% vs. 2.8%), and Enterobacter spp. (10.6% vs. 2.8%), and a lower rate of Klebsiella pneumoniae/K. oxytoca (4.3% vs. 8.5%) cultured from superficial and deep SSIs (p < 0.05). Of the S. aureus isolates, 35.0% and 44.4% were resistant to oxacillin/methicillin (MRSA) in ABR and TSS, respectively (p = 0.06). Looking at all SSIs, coagulase-negative staphylococci and K. pneumoniae/K. oxytoca at VABHS (4.0% and 10.4%, respectively) accounted for the biggest difference from NHSN (11.7% and 4.0%, respectively). Aside from MRSA, where there was no difference between VABHS and NHSN (42.9% vs. 43.7%, respectively; p = 0.87), statistically significant (p < 0.05) differences were observed among multi-drug-resistant K. pneumoniae/K. oxytoca (0% vs. 6.8%, respectively) and Escherichia coli (10.0% vs. 1.6%, respectively), as well as among extended-spectrum cephalosporin-resistant K. pneumoniae/K. oxytoca (4.8% vs. 13.2%, respectively) and Enterobacter (58.3% vs. 27.7%, respectively). VABHS had a greater proportion of SSIs in abdominal and vascular cases than did NHSN (48.6% vs. 22.5% and 13.2% vs. 1.5%, respectively). Overall, these differences were significant (p < 0.05).The TSS and ABR groups differed in the distribution of pathogens recovered. Those differences, along with SSI pathogen distribution, pathogenic isolate resistance profiles, and procedure-associated SSIs between VABHS and NHSN, warrant further investigation.

Related Organizations
Keywords

Bacteria, Anti-Infective Agents, Local, Humans, Surgical Wound Infection, Hand Hygiene, Hand Disinfection, Retrospective Studies

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    7
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
7
Average
Average
Top 10%
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!