Dataset Information

Wound edge protectors in open abdominal surgery to reduce surgical site infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Surgical site infections remain one of the most frequent complications following abdominal surgery and cause substantial costs, morbidity and mortality.

Objective

To assess the effectiveness of wound edge protectors in open abdominal surgery in reducing surgical site infections.

Evidence review

A systematic literature search was conducted according to a prespecified review protocol in a variety of data-bases combined with hand-searches for randomized controlled trials on wound edge protectors in patients undergoing laparotomy. A qualitative and quantitative analysis of included trials was conducted.

Findings

We identified 16 randomized controlled trials including 3695 patients investigating wound edge protectors published between 1972 and 2014. Critical appraisal uncovered a number of methodological flaws, predominantly in the older trials. Wound edge protectors significantly reduced the rate of surgical site infections (risk ratio 0.65; 95%CI, 0.51-0.83; p = 0.0007; I2 = 52%). The results were robust in a number of sensitivity analyses. A similar effect size was found in the subgroup of patients undergoing colorectal surgery (risk ratio 0.65; 95%CI, 0.44-0.97; p = 0.04; I2 = 56%). Of the two common types of wound protectors double ring devices were found to exhibit a greater protective effect (risk ratio 0.29; 95%CI, 0.15-0.55) than single-ring devices (risk ratio 0.71; 95%CI, 0.54-0.92), but this might largely be due to the lower quality of available data for double-ring devices. Exploratory subgroup analyses for the degree of contamination showed a larger protective effect in contaminated cases (0.44; 95%CI, 0.28-0.67; p = 0.0002, I2 = 23%) than in clean-contaminated surgeries (0.72, 95%CI, 0.57-0.91; p = 0.005; I2 = 46%) and a strong effect on the reduction of superficial surgical site infections (risk ratio 0.45; 95%CI, 0.24-0.82; p = 0.001; I2 = 72%).

Conclusions and relevance

Wound edge protectors significantly reduce the rate of surgical site infections in open abdominal surgery. Further trials are needed to explore their effectiveness in different risk constellations.

SUBMITTER: Mihaljevic AL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4376627 | biostudies-literature | 2015

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Wound edge protectors in open abdominal surgery to reduce surgical site infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Mihaljevic André L AL Müller Tara C TC Kehl Victoria V Friess Helmut H Kleeff Jörg J

PloS one 20150327 3

<h4>Importance</h4>Surgical site infections remain one of the most frequent complications following abdominal surgery and cause substantial costs, morbidity and mortality.<h4>Objective</h4>To assess the effectiveness of wound edge protectors in open abdominal surgery in reducing surgical site infections.<h4>Evidence review</h4>A systematic literature search was conducted according to a prespecified review protocol in a variety of data-bases combined with hand-searches for randomized controlled t ...[more]

PMID: 25816365

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Surgical site infections (SSIs) are highly prevalent in abdominal surgery despite evidence-based prevention measures. Since guidelines are not self-implementing and SSI-preventive compliance is often insufficient, implementation interventions have been developed to promote compliance. This systematic review aims to identify implementation interventions used in abdominal surgery to prevent SSIs and determine associations with SSI reductions. METHODS:Literature was searched in April 2018 (Medline/PubMed and Web of Science Core Collection). Implementation interventions were classified using the implementation subcategories of the EPOC Taxonomy (Cochrane Review Group Effective Practice and Organisation of Care, EPOC). Additionally, an effectiveness analysis was conducted on the association between the number of implementation interventions, specific compositions thereof, and absolute and relative SSI risk reductions. RESULTS:Forty studies were included. Implementation interventions used most frequently ("top five") were audit and feedback (80% of studies), organizational culture (70%), monitoring the performance of healthcare delivery (65%), reminders (53%), and educational meetings (45%). Twenty-nine studies (72.5%) used a multimodal strategy (?3 interventions). An effectiveness analysis revealed significant absolute and relative SSI risk reductions. E.g., numerically, the largest absolute risk reduction of 10.8% pertained to thirteen studies using 3-5 interventions (p?<?.001); however, this was from a higher baseline rate than those with fewer or more interventions. The largest relative risk reduction was 52.4% for studies employing the top five interventions, compared to 43.1% for those not including these. Furthermore, neither the differences in risk reduction between studies with different numbers of implementation interventions (bundle size) nor between studies including the top five interventions (vs. not) were significant. CONCLUSION:In SSI prevention in abdominal surgery, mostly standard bundles of implementation interventions are applied. While an effectiveness analysis of differences in SSI risk reduction by number and type of interventions did not render conclusive results, use of standard interventions such as audit and feedback, organizational culture, monitoring, reminders, and education at least does not seem to represent preventive malpractice. Further research should determine implementation interventions, or bundles thereof, which are most effective in promoting compliance with SSI-preventive measures in abdominal surgery.

Project description:BackgroundSurgical site infections (SSIs) after elective orthopaedic surgery are very stressful for patients due to frequent rehospitalizations with reoperations and poorer functional outcomes. Prevention of such events is therefore crucial. Although an evidence-based consensus is still lacking, preoperative decolonization could decrease SSI. Specifically, more information is needed about the effect of a preoperative decolonization procedure on SSI proportions in both Staphylococcus aureus carriers and non-S. aureus carriers after general orthopaedic surgery.Questions/purposesOur study addressed the following questions: (1) Does preoperative decolonization reduce the risk of SSI after general elective orthopaedic surgery in patients colonized with S. aureus? (2) Does preoperative decolonization reduce the risk of SSI among patients who are not colonized with S. aureus?MethodsIn this prospective, randomized, single-blinded trial, we recruited patients undergoing general elective orthopaedic surgery in one tertiary care center in Switzerland. Between November 2014 and September 2017, 1318 of 1897 screened patients were enrolled. Patients were allocated into either the S. aureus carrier group (35%, 465 of 1318 patients) or the noncarrier group (65%, 853 of 1318 patients) according to screening culture results. In the S. aureus group, 232 patients were allocated to the intervention arm and 233 were allocated to the control arm. Intervention was 5 days of daily chlorhexidine showers and mupirocin nasal ointment twice a day. Of the 853 noncarriers, 426 were allocated to the intervention arm and 427 were allocated to the control arm. All patients in both groups were analyzed in an intention-to-treat manner. The primary endpoint was SSI occurrence at 90 days postoperative and the secondary endpoint was SSI occurrence at 30 days postoperative.The initial sample size calculation was made for the S. aureus carrier group. Based on the literature review, a 4% proportion of SSI was expected in the control group. Thus, 726 carriers would have been needed to detect a relative risk reduction of 80% with a power of 80% at a two-sided α-error of 0.048 (adjusted for interim analysis). Assuming carrier prevalence of 27%, 2690 patients would have been needed in total. An interim analysis was performed after including half of the targeted S. aureus carriers (363 of 726). Based on the low infection rate in the control group (one of 179), a new sample size of 15,000 patients would have been needed. This was deemed not feasible and the trial was stopped prematurely.ResultsAmong carriers, there was no difference in the risk of SSI between the intervention and control arms (decolonized SSI risk: 0.4% [one of 232], control SSI risk: 0.4% [one of 233], risk difference: 0.0% [95% CI -1.2% to 1.2%], stratified for randomization stratification factors; p > 0.999). For noncarriers, there was no difference in risk between the intervention and control arms (decolonized SSI risk: 0.2% [one of 426], control SSI risk: 0.2% [one of 247], stratified risk difference: -0.0% [95% CI -0.7 to 0.6]; p = 0.973).ConclusionsWe found no difference in the risk of SSI between the decolonization and control groups, both in S. aureus carriers and noncarriers. Because of the low event numbers, no definite conclusion about efficacy of routine preoperative decolonization can be drawn. The results, however, may be helpful in future meta-analyses.Level of evidenceLevel II, therapeutic study.

Project description:ImportanceSurgeons are increasingly interested in using mobile and online applications with wound photography to monitor patients after surgery. Early work using remote care to diagnose surgical site infections (SSIs) demonstrated improved diagnostic accuracy using wound photographs to augment patients' electronic reports of symptoms, but it is unclear whether these findings are reproducible in real-world practice.ObjectiveTo determine how wound photography affects surgeons' abilities to diagnose SSIs in a pragmatic setting.Design, setting, and participantsThis prospective study compared surgeons' paired assessments of postabdominal surgery case vignettes with vs without wound photography for detection of SSIs. Data for case vignettes were collected prospectively from May 1, 2007, to January 31, 2009, at Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands, and from July 1, 2015, to February 29, 2016, at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee. The surgeons were members of the American Medical Association whose self-designated specialty is general, abdominal, colorectal, oncologic, or vascular surgery and who completed internet-based assessments from May 21 to June 10, 2016.InterventionSurgeons reviewed online clinical vignettes with or without wound photography.Main outcomes and measuresSurgeons' diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, confidence, and proposed management with respect to SSIs.ResultsA total of 523 surgeons (113 women and 410 men; mean [SD] age, 53 [10] years) completed a mean of 2.9 clinical vignettes. For the diagnosis of SSIs, the addition of wound photography did not change accuracy (863 of 1512 [57.1%] without and 878 of 1512 [58.1%] with photographs). Photographs decreased sensitivity (from 0.58 to 0.50) but increased specificity (from 0.56 to 0.63). In 415 of 1512 cases (27.4%), the addition of wound photography changed the surgeons' assessment (215 of 1512 [14.2%] changed from incorrect to correct and 200 of 1512 [13.2%] changed from correct to incorrect). Surgeons reported greater confidence when vignettes included a wound photograph compared with vignettes without a wound photograph, regardless of whether they correctly identified an SSI (median, 8 [interquartile range, 6-9] vs median, 8 [interquartile range, 7-9]; P < .001) but they were more likely to undertriage patients when vignettes included a wound photograph, regardless of whether they correctly identified an SSI.Conclusions and relevanceIn a practical simulation, wound photography increased specificity and surgeon confidence, but worsened sensitivity for detection of SSIs. Remote evaluation of patient-generated wound photographs may not accurately reflect the clinical state of surgical incisions. Effective widespread implementation of remote postoperative assessment with photography may require additional development of tools, participant training, and mechanisms to verify image quality.

Project description:IntroductionTelemedicine is being adopted for postoperative surveillance but requires evaluation for efficacy. This study tested a telephone Wound Healing Questionnaire (WHQ) to diagnose surgical site infection (SSI) after abdominal surgery in low- and middle-income countries.MethodA multi-centre, international, prospective study was embedded in the FALCON trial; a factorial RCT testing measures to reduce SSI in seven low- and middle-income countries (NCT03700749). It was conducted according to a pre-registered protocol (SWAT126) and reported according to STARD guidelines. The reference test was in-person review by a trained clinician at 30 postoperative days according to US Centres for Disease Control criteria. The index test was telephone administration of an adapted WHQ at 27 to 30 postoperative days by a researcher blinded to the outcome of in-person review. The sum of item response scores generated an overall score between 0 and 29. The primary outcome was the diagnostic accuracy of the WHQ, defined as the proportion of SSI correctly identified by the telephone WHQ, and summarized using the area under the receiving operator characteristic curve (AUROC) and diagnostic test accuracy statistics.ResultsPatients were included from three upper-middle income (396 patients, 13 hospitals), three lower-middle income (746 patients, 19 hospitals), and one low-income country (54 patients, 4 hospitals). 90.3% (1088 of 1196) patients were successfully contacted. Those with non-midline incisions (adjusted odds ratio: 0.36, 95% c.i. 0.17 to 0.73, P=0.005) or a confirmed diagnosis of SSI on in-person assessment (odds ratio: 0.42, 95% c.i. 0.20 to 0.92, P=0.006) were harder to reach. The questionnaire correctly discriminated between most patients with and without SSI (AUROC 0.869, 95% c.i. 0.824 to 0.914), which was consistent across subgroups. A representative cut-off score of ≥4 displayed a sensitivity of 0.701 (0.610-0.792), specificity of 0.911 (0.878-0.943), positive predictive value of 0.723 (0.633-0.814) and negative predictive value of 0.901 (0.867-0.935).ConclusionSSI can be diagnosed using a telephone questionnaire (obviating in-person assessment) in low resource settings.

Dataset Information

Wound edge protectors in open abdominal surgery to reduce surgical site infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Importance

Objective

Evidence review

Findings

Conclusions and relevance

Publications

Wound edge protectors in open abdominal surgery to reduce surgical site infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets