Quantifying and interpreting inequality of surgical site infections among operating rooms

The relative efficacy of multiple syringe tip disinfection techniques against virulent staphylococcus contamination

BACKGROUND

A recent study confirmed significant contamination of syringe tips following routine anaesthesia practice of at least 6 h in duration.

AIM

We assessed the relative efficacy of clinically relevant syringe tip disinfection techniques following contamination with the hyper transmissible and more pathogenic Staphylococcus aureus sequence type 5 (S. aureus ST5) strain characteristic associated with increased strength of biofilm formation and greater desiccation tolerance.

METHODS

Syringe tips (N=40) contaminated with S. aureus ST5 were randomized to 70% isopropyl pads with 10 or 60 s of drying time, scrubbing alcohol disinfection caps with 10 or 60 s of dwell time, or to non-scrubbing alcohol disinfection caps with 60 s of dwell time. The primary outcome was residual 24-h colony forming units (cfu) >10.

RESULTS

Scrubbing disinfection caps were more effective than alcohol pads (25% (12/48) <10 cfu for scrubbing caps (10- or 60-s dwell times) vs 0% (0/48) <10 cfu for alcohol pads (10 or 60 s of drying time), Holm-Sidak adjusted P=0.0016). Scrubbing disinfection caps were more effective than non-scrubbing alcohol disinfection caps (25% (12/48) <10 cfu for scrubbing alcohol caps (10- or 60-s dwell times) vs 2% (1/48) for non-scrubbing alcohol caps (60-s dwell time), adjusted P=0.0087).

CONCLUSIONS

Scrubbing alcohol caps are more effective than alcohol pads or non-scrubbing disinfecting caps for microbial reduction of syringe tips contaminated with the more pathogenic S. aureus ST5.

Estimation of the contribution to intraoperative pathogen transmission from bacterial contamination of patient nose, patient groin and axilla, anesthesia practitioners' hands, anesthesia machine, and intravenous lumen

BACKGROUND

Earlier studies showed net cost saving from anesthesia practitioners' use of a bundle of infection prevention products, with feedback on monitored Staphylococcus aureus intraoperative transmission. ESKAPE pathogens also include Enterococcus and gram-negative pathogens: Klebsiella, Acinetobacter, Pseudomonas, and Enterobacter. We evaluated whether bacterial contamination of patient nose, patient groin and axilla, anesthesia practitioners' hands, anesthesia machine, and intravenous lumen all contribute meaningfully to ESKAPE pathogen transmission within anesthesia work areas.

METHODS

The retrospective cohort study used bacterial count data from nine hospitals, 43 months, and 448 ESKAPE pathogen transmission events within anesthesia areas of 86 operating rooms. Transmission was measured within and between pairs of successive surgical cases performed in the same operating room on the same day.

RESULTS

There were 203 transmission events with S. aureus, 72 with Enterococcus, and 173 with gram negatives. ESKAPE pathogens in the nose contributed to transmission for 50% (99% confidence limit ≥45%) of case pairs, on the groin or axilla for 54% (≥49%), on the hands for 53% (≥47%), on the anesthesia machine for 21% (≥17%), and in the intravenous lumen for 24% (≥20%). ESKAPE pathogens in the nose started a transmission pathway for 27% (≥22%) of case pairs, on the groin or axilla for 24% (≥19%), on the hands for 38% (≥33%), on the anesthesia machine for 11% (≥7.6%), and in the intravenous lumen for 8.0% (≥5.3%). All P ≤ 0.0022 compared with 5%.

CONCLUSIONS

To prevent intraoperative ESKAPE pathogen transmission, anesthesia practitioners would need to address all five categories of infection control approaches: nasal antisepsis (e.g., povidone-iodine applied the morning of surgery), skin antisepsis (e.g., chlorhexidine wipes), hand antisepsis with dispensers next to the patient, decontamination of the anesthesia machine before and during anesthetics, and disinfecting caps for needleless connectors, disinfecting port protectors, and disinfecting caps for open female Luer type connectors.

Most hospital patients at risk for bacterial infection undergo an anesthetic: implications for infection control practices related to the anesthesia workspace

PURPOSE

Even with nearly 100% compliance with prophylactic antibiotic protocols, many surgical patients (> 5%) develop surgical site infections, some caused by pathogens transmitted from the anesthesia workspace (e.g., anesthesia machine), including multidrug-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Reducing contamination of the anesthesia workspace substantively reduces the risk of surgical site infections. We estimated the percentage of hospital patients at risk for health care-associated infections who may benefit from the application of basic preventive measures under the control of anesthesia practitioners (e.g., their hand hygiene).

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study which included every patient admitted to the University of Miami Health System from April 2021 through March 2022 for hospitalization, surgery, emergency department visits, or outpatient visits. Lists were created for the start date and times of every parenteral antibiotic administered and every anesthetic.

RESULTS

Among 28,213 patient encounters including parenteral antibiotic(s), more than half (64.3%) also included an anesthetic (99% confidence interval, 62.2 to 66.6). The hypothesis that most antibiotics were administered during encounters when a patient underwent an anesthetic was accepted (P < 0.001). This observation may seem counterintuitive because parenteral antibiotics were administered for fewer than half of the 53,235 anesthetics (34.2%). The result was a consequence of most anesthetics (63.5%) at the health system being conducted in nonoperating room locations, and only 7.2% of such patients received a parenteral antibiotic.

CONCLUSIONS

Because approximately two-thirds of patients who receive an intravenous antibiotic also undergo an anesthetic, greater use of effective infection control measures in the anesthesia operating room workspace has the potential to substantively reduce overall rates of hospital infections.

The efficacy of multifaceted versus single anesthesia work area infection control measures and the importance of surgical site infection follow-up duration

BACKGROUND

Earlier a randomized trial showed efficacy of a multifaceted intervention approach for reducing surgical site infection: hand hygiene, vascular care, environmental cleaning, patient decolonization (nasal povidone iodine, chlorhexidine wipes), with feedback on pathogen transmission. The follow-up prospective observational study showed effectiveness when applied to all operating rooms of an inpatient surgical suite. In practice, many organizations will at baseline not be using conditions equivalent to the control groups but instead functionally have had ongoing a single intervention for infection control (e.g., encouraging better hand hygiene). Organizations also differ in how well and long they survey every surgical patient for postoperative surgical site infection. Thus, estimation of the expected net cost savings from implementing multifaceted intervention depends on the relative efficacy of multifaceted approach versus single intervention approaches and on the incidence of surgical site infection, the latter depending itself on the monitoring period for infection development.

METHODS

The retrospective cohort analysis included 4865 patients from two single intervention and two multifaceted studies, each of the four studies with matched control groups. We used Poisson regression with robust variance to estimate the relative risk reduction in surgical site infections for the multifaceted approach versus single interventions and, with 30-day follow-up versus ≥60-day follow-up for infection.

RESULTS

The multifaceted approach was associated with an estimated 68% reduction in postoperative surgical site infections relative to single interventions (risk ratio 0.32, 97.5% confidence interval 0.15-0.70, P = 0.001). There were approximately 2.61-fold more surgical site infections detected with follow-up for at least 60 days of medical records relative to 30 days of records reviewed (97.5% CI 1.62 to 4.21, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

An evidence-based, multifaceted approach to anesthesia work area infection control can generate substantial reductions in surgical site infections. A follow-up period of at least 60-days is indicated for infection detection.

Transmission of Staphylococcus aureus in the anaesthesia work area has greater risk of association with development of surgical site infection when resistant to the prophylactic antibiotic administered for surgery

BACKGROUND

The extent to which the transmission of prophylactic-antibiotic-resistant bacteria from the anaesthesia work area increases the risk of surgical site infection (SSI) is unknown. It was hypothesized that the risk of SSI would increase progressively from no transmission to transmission of prophylactic-antibiotic-resistant isolates.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of archival samples collected in two previously published studies with similar inclusion criteria and sample collection methodology (observational study 2009-2010 and randomized trial 2018-2019). Archival isolates were linked by barcode to all patient demographic and procedural information, including the prophylactic antibiotic administered, transmission and development of SSI. For this study, all archival isolates underwent prophylactic antibiotic susceptibility testing, and the ordered association of transmission of Staphylococcus aureus (no transmission, transmission of prophylactic-antibiotic-susceptible isolates and transmission of prophylactic-antibiotic-resistant isolates) with SSI was assessed.

RESULTS

The risk of development of SSI was 2% (8/406) without S. aureus transmission, 11% (9/84) with transmission of S. aureus isolates that were susceptible to the prophylactic antibiotic used, and 18% (4/22) with transmission of prophylactic-antibiotic-resistant S. aureus isolates. The Cochrane-Armitage two-sided test for ordered association was P<0.0001. Treating these three groups as 0, 1 and 2, by exact logistic regression, the odds of SSI increased by 3.59 with each unit increase (95% confidence interval 1.92-6.64; P<0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Transmission of S. aureus in the anaesthesia work area reliably increases the risk of SSI, especially when the isolates are resistant to the prophylactic antibiotic administered.

Quantifying and Interpreting Inequality in Surgical Site Infections per Quarter Among Anesthetizing Locations and Specialties

Background Earlier studies have shown that prevention of surgical site infection can achieve net cost savings when targeted to operating rooms with the most surgical site infections. Methodology This retrospective cohort study included all 231,057 anesthetics between May 2017 and June 2022 at a large teaching hospital. The anesthetics were administered in operating rooms, procedure rooms, radiology, and other sites. The 8,941 postoperative infections were identified from International Classification of Diseases diagnosis codes relevant to surgical site infections documented during all follow-up encounters over 90 days postoperatively. To quantify the inequality in the counts of infections among anesthetizing locations, the Gini index was used, with the Gini index being proportional to the sum of the absolute pairwise differences among anesthetizing locations in the counts of infections. Results The Gini index for infections among the 112 anesthetizing locations at the hospital was 0.64 (99% confidence interval = 0.56 to 0.71). The value of 0.64 is so large that, for comparison, it exceeds nearly all countries' Gini index for income inequality. The 50% of locations with the fewest infections accounted for 5% of infections. The 10% of locations with the most infections accounted for 40% of infections and 15% of anesthetics. Among the 57 operating room locations, there was no association between counts of cases and infections (Spearman correlation coefficient r = 0.01). Among the non-operating room locations (e.g., interventional radiology), there was a significant association (Spearman r = 0.79). Conclusions Targeting specific anesthetizing locations is important for the multiple interventions to reduce surgical site infections that represent fixed costs irrespective of the number of patients (e.g., specialized ventilatory systems and nightly ultraviolet-C disinfection).

Effectiveness and feasibility of an evidence-based intraoperative infection control program targeting improved basic measures: a post-implementation prospective case-cohort study

STUDY OBJECTIVE

A randomized controlled study demonstrated that an optimized intraoperative infection control program targeting basic preventive measures can reduce Staphylococcus aureus transmission and surgical site infections. In this study we address potential limitations of operating room heterogeneity of infections and compliance with behavioral interventions following adoption into clinical practice.

DESIGN

A post-implementation prospective case-cohort study.

SETTING

Twenty-three operating rooms at a large teaching hospital.

PATIENTS

A total of 801 surgical patients [425 (53%) women; 350 (44%) ASA > 2, age 54.6 ± 15.9 years] were analyzed for the primary and 804 for the secondary outcomes.

INTERVENTIONS

A multifaceted, evidence-based intraoperative infection control program involving hand hygiene, vascular care, and environmental cleaning improvements was implemented for 23 operating room environments. Bacterial transmission monitoring was used to provide monthly feedback for intervention optimization.

MEASUREMENTS

S. aureus transmission (primary) and surgical site infection (secondary).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The incidence of S. aureus transmission and surgical site infection before (3.5 months) and after (4.5 months) infection control optimization was assessed. Optimization was defined by a sustained reduction in anesthesia work area bacterial reservoir isolate counts. Poisson regression with robust error variances was used to estimate the incidence risk ratio (IRR) of intraoperative S. aureus transmission and surgical site infection for the independent variable of optimization.

MAIN RESULTS

Optimization was associated with decreased S. aureus transmission [24% before (85/357) to 9% after (42/444), IRR 0.39, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.56, P < .001] and surgical site infections [8% before (29/360) and 3% after (15/444) (IRR 0.42, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.77, P = .005; adjusted for American Society of Anesthesiologists' physical status, aIRR 0.45, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.82, P = .009].

CONCLUSION

An optimized intraoperative infection control program targeting improvements in basic preventive measures is an effective and feasible approach for reducing S. aureus transmission and surgical site infection development.

Statistical Design of Overnight Trials for the Evaluation of the Number of Operating Rooms That Can Be Disinfected by an Ultraviolet Light Disinfection Robotic System

Background and objective

The number of ultraviolet light disinfection robot systems that are needed for a facility’s surgical suite(s) and/or procedure suite(s) depends in part on how many rooms need to be disinfected overnight by each robot and how long this will take. The answer needs to be determined separately for each surgical and procedure suite because those variables vary both among facilities and among operating rooms or procedure rooms within facilities. In this study, we consider statistical designs to assess how many rooms a facility can reliably (≥90% chance) disinfect overnight using an ultraviolet light disinfection robot system.

Methods

We used 133,927 observed disinfection times from 700 rooms as a population from which repeated samples were drawn with replacement in Monte-Carlo simulations. We used eight-hour and 10-hour shift lengths being multiples of 40 hours for full-time hourly employees.

Results

One possible strategy that we examined was to estimate total disinfection times by estimating the mean for each room and then summing up the means. However, that did not correctly answer the question of how many rooms can reliably be available for the next day’s first case. Summing up a percentile (e.g., 90%) instead also was inaccurate, because the proper percentile depended on the number of rooms.

A suitable strategy is a brief trial (e.g., nine nights or 19 nights) with the endpoint being the daily number of rooms disinfected. Empirically, the smallest count of rooms disinfected among nine nights or the second smallest count among 19 nights are 10^th percentiles (i.e., ≈90% probability that at least that number of rooms can be disinfected in the future). The drawback is that while this approach gives the probability of a night with fewer rooms disinfected, it does not give information as to how many fewer rooms may either skip ultraviolet decontamination or start late the next workday because disinfection was not completed. Our simulations showed that there is a substantial probability (≥95%) of at most two rooms fewer or one room greater than the 10^th percentile with a nine-night trial and one room fewer or greater with a 19-night trial.

Conclusions

Because probability distributions of disinfection times are heterogeneous both among rooms and among treatments for the same room, each facility should plan to perform its own trial of nine nights or 19 nights. This will provide results that are within two rooms or one room of the correct answer in the long term. This information can be used when planning purchasing decisions, leasing, and technician staffing decisions.