Operating room myths: what is the evidence for common practices

The carbon footprint of the operating room related to infection prevention measures: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Infection prevention measures are widely used in operating rooms (ORs). However, the extent to which they are at odds with ambitions to reduce the health sector's carbon footprint remains unclear.

AIM

To synthesize the evidence base for the carbon footprint of commonly used infection prevention measures in the OR, namely medical devices and instruments, surgical attire and air treatment systems.

METHODS

A scoping review of the international scientific literature was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. The search was performed in PubMed and Google Scholar. Articles published between 2010 and June 2021 on infection prevention measures, their impact on the health sector's carbon footprint, and risk for surgical site infections (SSIs) were included.

FINDINGS

Although hospitals strive to reduce their carbon footprint, many infection prevention measures result in increased emissions. Evidence suggests that the use of disposable items instead of reusable items generally increases the carbon footprint, depending on sources of electricity. Controversy exists regarding the correlation between air treatment systems, contamination and the incidence of SSIs. The literature indicates that new air treatment systems consume more energy and do not necessarily reduce SSIs compared with conventional systems.

CONCLUSION

Infection prevention measures in ORs can be at odds with sustainability. The use of new air treatment systems and disposable items generally leads to significant greenhouse gas emissions, and does not necessarily reduce the incidence of SSIs. Alternative infection prevention measures with less environmental impact are available. Implementation could be facilitated by embracing environmental impact as an additional dimension of quality of care, which should change current risk-based approaches for the prevention of SSIs.

Frequent Door Openings During Cardiac Surgery Are Associated With Increased Risk for Surgical Site Infection: A Prospective Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Preliminary studies that analyzed surrogate markers have suggested that operating room (OR) door openings may be a risk factor for surgical site infection (SSI). We therefore aimed to estimate the effect of OR door openings on SSI risk in patients undergoing cardiac surgery.

METHODS

This prospective, observational study involved consecutive patients undergoing cardiac surgery in 2 prespecified ORs equipped with automatic door-counting devices from June 2016 to October 2017. Occurrence of an SSI within 30 days after cardiac surgery was our primary outcome measure. Respective outcome data were obtained from a national SSI surveillance cohort. We analyzed the relationship between mean OR door opening frequencies and SSI risk by use of uni- and multivariable Cox regression models.

RESULTS

A total of 301 594 OR door openings were recorded during the study period, with 87 676 eligible door openings being logged between incision and skin closure. There were 688 patients included in the study, of whom 24 (3.5%) developed an SSI within 30 days after surgery. In uni- and multivariable analysis, an increased mean door opening frequency during cardiac surgery was associated with higher risk for consecutive SSI (adjusted hazard ratio per 5-unit increment, 1.49; 95% confidence interval, 1.11-2.00; P = .008). The observed effect was driven by internal OR door openings toward the clean instrument preparation room.

CONCLUSIONS

Frequent door openings during cardiac surgery were independently associated with an increased risk for SSI. This finding warrants further study to establish a potentially causal relationship between OR door openings and the occurrence of SSI.

Effectiveness of architectural separation of septic and aseptic operating theatres for improving process quality and patient outcomes: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Architectural division of aseptic and septic operating theatres is a distinct structural feature of surgical departments in Germany. Internationally, hygienists and microbiologists mainly recommend functional separation (i.e. aseptic procedures first) without calling for separate operating floors and rooms. However, patients with severe musculoskeletal infections (e.g. joint empyema, spondylodiscitis, deep implant-associated infections) may benefit from the permanent availability of septic operating capacities without delay caused by an ongoing aseptic surgical program. A systematic literature review on the influence of a structural separation of septic and aseptic operating theatres on process and/or outcome quality has not yet been conducted.

METHODS

Systematic literature search in PubMed MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, CINAHL and the Cochrane Library, screening of referenced citations, and assessment of grey literature.

RESULTS

A total of 572 articles were found through the systematic literature search. No head-to-head studies (neither randomised, quasi-randomised nor observational) were identified which examined the impact of structural separation of septic and aseptic operating theatres on process and/or outcome quality.

CONCLUSIONS

This review did not identify evidence in favour nor against architectural separation of septic or aseptic operating theatre. Specifically, there is no evidence of a harmful effect of architectural separation. Unless prospective studies, ideally randomised trials, will be available, it is unjustified to call for abolishing established hospital structures. Future investigations must address patient-centered endpoints, surgical site infections, process quality and hospital economy.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO (International prospective register of systematic reviews): CRD42018086568.

Initial adhesion of methicillin-sensitive and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus strains to untreated and electropolished surgical steel drill bits

Electropolishing of stainless steel has been thoroughly investigated as a prophylactic measure to prevent bacterial colonization of orthopaedic implants and infection. Initial bacterial adhesion onto surgical drill bits as a possible factor for orthopaedic surgical site infections has not yet been documented. The present study investigated the influence of electropolishing on initial staphylococcal adhesion onto AISI 440A stainless steel drill bits. Specifically, one methicillin-susceptible standard laboratory Staphylococcus aureus type strain (DSM 20231^T), one methicillin-resistant S. aureus reference strain (DSM 46320) and one methicillin-resistant clinical isolate from an infected orthopaedic implant were used. After standard sterilization, drill bits were immersed in the respective bacterial suspension; bacteria adherent to surface were harvested by vortexing the drill bits in phosphate-buffered saline and viable counts of bacteria transferred from the suspension were made (transferred to log10 for further analysis). Electropolishing significantly reduced adhesion of the clinical S. aureus strain and the S. aureus DSM 20231^T. However, electropolishing significantly increased adhesion of the S. aureus DSM 46320. These results show that electropolishing significantly influences initial adhesion of S. aureus strains to surgical drill bits and that the nature of this influence depends on the S. aureus strain examined. For a general recommendation of electropolishing drill bits and guidelines for their handling during surgery, further studies with more strains isolated from infected wounds are suggested.

Assessment of operating room airflow using air particle counts and direct observation of door openings

BACKGROUND

The role of the operating room (OR) environment has been thought to contribute to surgical site infection rates. The quality of OR air, disruption of airflow, and other factors may increase contamination risks. We measured air particulate counts (APCs) to determine if they increased in relation to traffic, door opening, and other common activities.

METHODS

During 1 week, we recorded APCs in 5-minute intervals and movement of health care workers. Trained observers recorded information about traffic, door openings, job title of the opener, and the reason for opening.

RESULTS

At least 1 OR door was open during 47% of all readings. There were 13.4 door openings per hour during cases. Door opening rates ranged from 0.19-0.28 per minute. During this time, a total of 660 air measurements were obtained. The mean APCs were 9,238 particles (95% confidence interval [CI], 5,494- 12,982) at baseline and 14,292 particles (95% CI, 12,382-16,201) during surgery. Overall APCs increased 13% when either door was opened (P < .15). Larger particles that correlated to bacterial size were elevated significantly (P < .001) on door opening.

CONCLUSIONS

We observed numerous instances of verbal communication and equipment movement. Improving efficiency of communication and equipment can aid in reduction of traffic. Further study is needed to examine links between microbiologic sampling, outcome data, and particulate matter to enable study of risk factors and effects of personnel movement.