Dataset Information

Infection Risk of Lumbar Epidural Injection in the Operating Theatre Prior to Lumbar Fusion Surgery.

ABSTRACT: Purpose:To determine the association between preoperative lumbar epidural injections (LEIs) in the operating theater (OR) and the occurrence of surgical site infection (SSI) after posterior lumbar instrumented fusion surgery. Methods:This study was performed from January 2015 to September 2019. We enrolled 2312 patients who underwent lumbar surgery without LEIs (control group) and 469 patients who underwent lumbar surgery after LEIs in the OR. We further separated the patients by the time interval between the LEIs and surgery: 1) for the 0-1 M group, lumbar surgery was performed within 1 month after the LEIs, and 2) for the >1 M group, it was performed more than 1 month after the LEIs. Results:The postoperative infection rate in the 0-1 M group was considerably higher than that in the control group (p = 0.0101). We further subdivided the 0-1 M and >1 M groups into four subgroups: a) the 0-1 MNS group included patients in the 0-1 M group who did not receive steroids; b) the 0-1 MS group who received steroids; c) the >1 MNS group included patients in the >1 M group who did not receive steroids; d) the >1 MS group who received steroids. The postoperative infection rate in the 0-1 MS subgroup was considerably higher than that in the control group (p = 0.0018). However, the infection rate was lower in the >1 MS subgroup (p = 0.1650). There were no statistically significant differences in the postoperative infection rate between the control group and the two non-steroid groups (0-1 MNS group, p = 0.4961; 1 MNS group, p = 0.7381). Conclusion:The administration of LEIs without steroids in the OR before lumbar instrumented fusion does not significantly increase patients' risk of postoperative infection. We recommend avoiding steroid injections administered within 1 month before lumbar instrumented fusion.

SUBMITTER: Li P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7457848 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Infection Risk of Lumbar Epidural Injection in the Operating Theatre Prior to Lumbar Fusion Surgery.

Li Peng P Hou Xiuwei X Gao Lifeng L Zheng Xiaochen X

Journal of pain research 20200826

<h4>Purpose</h4>To determine the association between preoperative lumbar epidural injections (LEIs) in the operating theater (OR) and the occurrence of surgical site infection (SSI) after posterior lumbar instrumented fusion surgery.<h4>Methods</h4>This study was performed from January 2015 to September 2019. We enrolled 2312 patients who underwent lumbar surgery without LEIs (control group) and 469 patients who underwent lumbar surgery after LEIs in the OR. We further separated the patients by ...[more]

PMID: 32922068

Similar Datasets

Project description:Several studies have reported on the negative impact of interruptions and distractions on anaesthetic, surgical and team performance in the operating theatre. This study aimed to gain a deeper understanding of these events and why they remain part of everyday clinical practice. We used a mixed methods observational study design. We scored each distractor and interruption according to an established scheme during induction of anaesthesia and the surgical procedure for 58 general surgical cases requiring general anaesthesia. We made field notes of observations, small conversations and meetings. We observed 64 members of staff for 148 hours and recorded 4594 events, giving a mean (SD) event rate of 32.8 (16.3) h-1 . The most frequent events observed during induction of anaesthesia were door movements, which accounted for 869 (63%) events, giving a mean (SD) event rate of 28.1 (14.5) h-1 . These, however, had little impact. The most common events observed during surgery were case-irrelevant verbal communication and smartphone usage, which accounted for 1020 (32%) events, giving a mean (SD) event rate of 9.0 (4.2) h-1 . These occurred mostly in periods of low work-load in a sub-team. Participants ranged from experiencing these events as severe disruption through to a welcome distraction that served to keep healthcare professionals active during low work-load, as well as reinforcing the social connections between colleagues. Mostly, team members showed no awareness of the need for silence among other sub-teams and did not vocalise the need for silence to others. Case-irrelevant verbal communication and smartphone usage may serve a physical and psychological need. The extent to which healthcare professionals may feel disrupted depends on the situation and context. When a team member was disrupted, a resilient team response often lacked. Reducing disruptive social activity might be a powerful strategy to develop a habit of cross-monitoring and mutual help across surgical and anaesthetic sub-teams. Further research is needed on how to bridge cultural borders and develop resilient interprofessional behaviours.

Project description:BackgroundSmoking cessation represents an opportunity to reduce both short and long-term effects of smoking on complications after lumbar fusion and smoking-related morbidity and mortality. However, the cost-effectiveness of smoking-cessation interventions prior to lumbar fusion is not fully known.MethodsWe created a decision-analytic Markov model to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of 5 smoking-cessation strategies (behavioral counseling, nicotine replacement therapy [NRT], bupropion or varenicline monotherapy, and a combined intervention) prior to single-level, instrumented lumbar posterolateral fusion (PLF) from the health payer perspective. Probabilities, costs, and utilities were obtained from published sources. We calculated the costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) associated with each strategy over multiple time horizons and accounted for uncertainty with probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSAs) consisting of 10,000 second-order Monte Carlo simulations.ResultsEvery smoking-cessation intervention was more effective and less costly than usual care at the lifetime horizon. In the short term, behavioral counseling, NRT, varenicline monotherapy, and the combined intervention were also cost-saving, while bupropion monotherapy was more effective but more costly than usual care. The mean lifetime cost savings for behavioral counseling, NRT, bupropion monotherapy, varenicline monotherapy, and the combined intervention were $3,291 (standard deviation [SD], $868), $2,571 (SD, $479), $2,851 (SD, $830), $6,767 (SD, $1,604), and $34,923 (SD, $4,248), respectively. The minimum efficacy threshold (relative risk for smoking cessation) for lifetime cost savings varied from 1.01 (behavioral counseling) to 1.15 (varenicline monotherapy). A PSA revealed that the combined smoking-cessation intervention was always more effective and less costly than usual care.ConclusionsEven brief smoking-cessation interventions yield large short-term and long-term cost savings. Smoking-cessation interventions prior to PLF can both reduce costs and improve patient outcomes as health payers/systems shift toward value-based reimbursement (e.g., bundled payments) or population health models.Level of evidenceEconomic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Dataset Information

Infection Risk of Lumbar Epidural Injection in the Operating Theatre Prior to Lumbar Fusion Surgery.

Publications

Infection Risk of Lumbar Epidural Injection in the Operating Theatre Prior to Lumbar Fusion Surgery.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets