1
|
McNamee C, Rakovac A, Cawley DT. Sustainable surgical practices: A comprehensive approach to reducing environmental impact. Surgeon 2024; 22:253-259. [PMID: 37718181 DOI: 10.1016/j.surge.2023.08.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/22/2023] [Accepted: 08/28/2023] [Indexed: 09/19/2023]
Abstract
This paper presents a comprehensive overview of the environmental impact of surgical procedures and highlights potential strategies to reduce the associated greenhouse gas emissions. We discuss procurement, waste management, and energy consumption, providing examples of successful interventions in each area. We also emphasize the importance of adopting the Green Theatre Checklist as a useful tool for clinicians aiming to implement sustainable surgical practices.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Conor McNamee
- University College Dublin, National University of Ireland, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland.
| | - Ana Rakovac
- Irish Doctors for the Environment, Ireland; Laboratory Medicine Department, Tallaght University Hospital, Dublin 24, Ireland
| | - Derek T Cawley
- Mater Private Hospital, Dublin 1, Ireland; Irish Doctors for the Environment, Ireland; Dept of Surgery, University of Galway, Ireland
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Rutala WA, Weber DJ. Reprocessing semicritical items: An overview and an update on the shift from HLD to sterilization for endoscopes. Am J Infect Control 2023; 51:A96-A106. [PMID: 37890958 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajic.2023.01.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/03/2023] [Accepted: 01/04/2023] [Indexed: 10/29/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Semicritical medical devices are defined as items that come into contact with mucous membranes or nonintact skin (e.g., gastrointestinal endoscopes, endocavitary probes). Such medical devices require minimally high-level disinfection. METHODS Analyze the methods used to reprocess semicritical medical devices and identify methods and new technologies to reduce the risk of infection. RESULTS The reprocessing methods for semicritical medical devices is described as well as a shift from high-level disinfection to sterilization for lumened endoscopes. CONCLUSIONS Strict adherence to current guidelines and transition to sterilization for endoscopes is required as more outbreaks have been linked to inadequately disinfected endoscopes and other semicritical items than any other reusable medical devices.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- William A Rutala
- Statewide Program for Infection Control and Epidemiology, University of North Carolina Hospitals, Chapel Hill, NC; Division of Infectious Diseases, UNC School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC.
| | - David J Weber
- Statewide Program for Infection Control and Epidemiology, University of North Carolina Hospitals, Chapel Hill, NC; Division of Infectious Diseases, UNC School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC; Department of Infection Prevention, Hospital Epidemiology, University of North Carolina Hospitals, Chapel Hill, NC
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
McNamee C, Rakovac A, Cawley DT. The Environmental Impact of Spine Surgery and the Path to Sustainability. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2023; 48:545-551. [PMID: 36580585 DOI: 10.1097/brs.0000000000004550] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/13/2022] [Accepted: 11/18/2022] [Indexed: 12/31/2022]
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN Narrative literature review. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to review published literature discussing sustainable health care and to identify aspects that pertain to spine surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA In recent years, research has investigated the contribution of surgical specialties to climate change. To our knowledge, no article has yet been published discussing the impact specific to spinal procedures and possible mitigation strategies. METHODS A literature search was performed for the present study on relevant terms across four electronic databases. References of included studies were also investigated. RESULTS Spine surgery has a growing environmental impact. Investigations of analogous specialties find that procurement is the single largest source of emissions. Carbon-conscious procurement strategies will be needed to mitigate this fully, but clinicians can best reduce their impact by adopting a minimalist approach when using surgical items. Reduced wastage of disposable goods and increased recycling are beneficial. Technology can aid remote access to clinicians, and also enable patient education. CONCLUSIONS Spine-surgery-specific research is warranted to evaluate its carbon footprint. A broad range of measures is recommended from preventative medicine to preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative spine care. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE 5.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Conor McNamee
- University College Dublin, National University of Ireland, Belfield, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Ana Rakovac
- Irish Doctors for the Environment
- Laboratory Medicine Department, Tallaght University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Derek T Cawley
- Mater Private Hospital, Dublin, Ireland
- Irish Doctors for the Environment
- Department of Surgery, University of Galway, Galway, Ireland
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Wang G, Wang D, Mei X, Huang M, Zhang L, Li X. Effects of electron beam irradiation on microbial contamination and quality of Shengmai Yin. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 2022. [DOI: 10.1007/s10967-022-08429-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/15/2022]
|
5
|
Josephs-Spaulding J, Singh OV. Medical Device Sterilization and Reprocessing in the Era of Multidrug-Resistant (MDR) Bacteria: Issues and Regulatory Concepts. FRONTIERS IN MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY 2021; 2:587352. [PMID: 35047882 PMCID: PMC8757868 DOI: 10.3389/fmedt.2020.587352] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/25/2020] [Accepted: 11/10/2020] [Indexed: 12/20/2022] Open
Abstract
The emergence of multidrug-resistant (MDR) bacteria threatens humans in various health sectors, including medical devices. Since formal classifications for medical device sterilization and disinfection were established in the 1970's, microbial adaptation under adverse environmental conditions has evolved rapidly. MDR microbial biofilms that adhere to medical devices and recurrently infect patients pose a significant threat in hospitals. Therefore, it is essential to mitigate the risk associated with MDR outbreaks by establishing novel recommendations for medical device sterilization, in a world of MDR. MDR pathogens typically thrive on devices with flexible accessories, which are easily contaminated with biofilms due to previous patient use and faulty sterilization or reprocessing procedures. To prevent danger to immunocompromised individuals, there is a need to regulate the classification of reprocessed medical device sterilization. This article aims to assess the risks of improper sterilization of medical devices in the era of MDR when sterilization procedures for critical medical devices are not followed to standard. Further, we discuss key regulatory recommendations for consistent sterilization of critical medical devices in contrast to the risks of disinfection reusable medical devices.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jonathan Josephs-Spaulding
- Department of Environmental Health and Engineering, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, United States
| | - Om V. Singh
- Advance Academic Program, The Johns Hopkins University, Washington, DC, United States
- Technology Science Group (TSG) Consulting Inc., A Science Group Company, Washington, DC, United States
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Abdalla Y. Value based healthcare: Maximizing efficacy and managing risk with spinal implant technology. INTERDISCIPLINARY NEUROSURGERY 2020. [DOI: 10.1016/j.inat.2020.100810] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/24/2022] Open
|
7
|
Agarwal A, Lin B, Agarwal AG, Elgafy H, Schultz C, Agarwal AK, Goel VK, Sigler V, Karas C, Gidvani S, Wang JC, Anand N, Garfin SR. A Multicenter Trial Demonstrating Presence or Absence of Bacterial Contamination at the Screw-Bone Interface Owing to Absence or Presence of Pedicle Screw Guard, Respectively, During Spinal Fusion. Clin Spine Surg 2020; 33:E364-E368. [PMID: 32168115 DOI: 10.1097/bsd.0000000000000976] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN A prospective multicenter study. OBJECTIVE The objective of this study was to assess bacterial contamination in current practices of pedicle screw handling and comparing it to a novel method of using an intraoperative, sterile implant guard for screws. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA Postoperative infections occur at the higher end of 2%-13%, as cited in the literature, and are underestimated due to various reasons in such publications. Despite concerns associated with vancomycin application immediately before closure, it is theoretically impossible to irrigate the screw-bone interface postimplantation. Consequently, any contamination of pedicle screw before implantation is permanent, and has the potential to cause deep-bone infection, or hardware loosening due to encapsulation of biofilm between the bone and the screw. Therefore, continued vigilance and effective preventive measures should be undertaken if available. MATERIALS AND METHODS Two groups of presterile individually-packaged pedicle screws, one incased in a sterile, protective guard (group 1: G) and the other without such a guard (group 2: NG), 31 samples in each group were distributed over 28 spinal fusion surgeries at 5 independent hospitals groups. Each were loaded onto the insertion device by the scrub tech and left on the sterile table. Twenty minutes later, the lead surgeon who had just finished preparing the surgical site, handles the pedicle screw, to check the fit with the insertion device. Then, instead of implantation, it was transferred to a sterile container using fresh sterile gloves for bacterial analysis. RESULTS The standard unguarded pedicle screws presented bioburden in the range of 10 to 10 colonies forming units per screw, whereas the guarded pedicle screws showed no bioburden. CONCLUSION Standard, current, handling of pedicle screws leads to bacterial contamination, which can be avoided if the screws are sterilely prepackaged with an intraoperative guard (preinstalled).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Chris Karas
- OhioHealth Grant Medical Center, Columbus, OH
| | | | | | - Neel Anand
- Spine Center, Cedars Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles
| | - Steve R Garfin
- Department of Orthopaedics, University of California, San Diego, CA
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Agarwal A, Kelkar A, Agarwal AG, Jayaswal D, Schultz C, Jayaswal A, Goel VK, Agarwal AK, Gidvani S. Implant Retention or Removal for Management of Surgical Site Infection After Spinal Surgery. Global Spine J 2020; 10:640-646. [PMID: 32677561 PMCID: PMC7359681 DOI: 10.1177/2192568219869330] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN A literature review. OBJECTIVE To summarize the implant removal rate, common bacterial organisms found, time of onset, ratio of superficial to deep infection, and regurgitating the prevalence among all the retrospective and prospective studies on management and characterization of surgical site infections (SSIs). METHODS PubMed was searched for articles published between 2000 and 2018 on the management or characterization of SSIs after spinal surgery. Only prospective and retrospective studies were included. RESULTS A total of 49 articles were found relevant to the objective. These studies highlighted the importance of implant removal to avoid recurrence of SSI. The common organisms detected were methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus epidermis, Staphylococcus epidermis, Staphylococcus aureus, and Propionibacterium acnes, with prevalence of 1% to 15%. A major proportion of all were deep SSI, with minority reporting on late-onset SSI. CONCLUSION Long-term antibiotics administration, and continuous irrigation and debridement were common suggestion among the authors; however, the key measure undertaken or implied by most authors to avoid risk of recurrence was removal or replacement of implants for late-onset SSI.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Aakash Agarwal
- University of Toledo, Toledo, OH, USA,Aakash Agarwal, Department of Bioengineering and Orthopaedics Surgery, University of Toledo, 5051 Nitschke Hall, MS 303, 2801 West Bancroft Street, Toledo, OH 43606, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
9
|
Agarwal A, Lin B, Elgafy H, Goel V, Karas C, Schultz C, Anand N, Garfin S, Wang J, Agarwal A. Updates on Evidence-Based Practices to Reduce Preoperative and Intraoperative Contamination of Implants in Spine Surgery: A Narrative Review. Spine Surg Relat Res 2020; 4:111-116. [PMID: 32405555 PMCID: PMC7217678 DOI: 10.22603/ssrr.2019-0038] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/10/2019] [Accepted: 05/28/2019] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
The current communication seeks to provide an updated narrative review on latest methods of reducing implant contaminations used during spine surgery. Recent literature review has shown that both preoperative reprocessing and intraoperative handling of implants seem to contaminate implants. In brief, during preoperative phase, the implants undergo repeated bulk cleaning with dirty instruments from the OR, leading to residue buildup at the interfaces and possibly on the surfaces too. This, due to its concealed nature, remains unnoticed by the SPD (sterile processing department) or other hospital staff. Nevertheless, these can be avoided by using individually prepackaged presterilized implants. In the intraoperative phase, the implants (in the sterile field) are directly touched by the scrub tech with soiled (assisting the surgeon dispose the tissues from the instruments in use) gloves for loading onto an insertion device. It is then kept exposed on the working table (either separately or next to the used instruments as the pedicles hole are being prepared). Latest investigation has shown that by the time it is implanted in the patient, it can harbor up to 10e7 bacterial colony-forming units. The same implants were devoid of such colony-forming units, when sheathed by an impermeable sterile sheath around the sterile implant.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Aakash Agarwal
- Department of Biology, Bioengineering and Orthopaedics Surgery, University of Toledo, Toledo, USA
| | - Boren Lin
- Department of Biology, Bioengineering and Orthopaedics Surgery, University of Toledo, Toledo, USA
| | - Hossein Elgafy
- Department of Biology, Bioengineering and Orthopaedics Surgery, University of Toledo, Toledo, USA
| | - Vijay Goel
- Department of Biology, Bioengineering and Orthopaedics Surgery, University of Toledo, Toledo, USA
| | - Chris Karas
- Bone and Joint Center, OhioHealth Grant Medical, Columbus, USA
| | - Christian Schultz
- Department of Biology, Bioengineering and Orthopaedics Surgery, University of Toledo, Toledo, USA
| | - Neel Anand
- Spine Center, Cedars Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, USA
| | - Steve Garfin
- Department of Orthopaedics, University of California, San Diego, USA
| | - Jeffrey Wang
- Department of Orthopaedics, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, USA
| | - Anand Agarwal
- Department of Biology, Bioengineering and Orthopaedics Surgery, University of Toledo, Toledo, USA
| |
Collapse
|