Awareness of Practice and Comparison with Best Evidence in Surgical Site Infection Prevention in Colorectal Surgery

Josep M Badia, Anna L Casey, Inés Rubio-Pérez, Nares Arroyo-García, Eloy Espin, Sebastiano Biondo, José M Balibrea, Josep M Badia, Anna L Casey, Inés Rubio-Pérez, Nares Arroyo-García, Eloy Espin, Sebastiano Biondo, José M Balibrea

Abstract

Background: The use of mechanical bowel preparation and prophylaxis with oral antimicrobial agents can prevent surgical site infection (SSI) in colorectal surgical procedures, but routine adoption of these and other practices by surgeons has been limited. The aim of this study was to determine the actual practice and surgeon beliefs about preventative measures in elective colorectal operations and to compare them with established recommendations. Methods: Web-based survey was sent to colorectal surgeons assessing knowledge, beliefs, and practices regarding the use of preventative measures for SSI. Results: Of 355 surgeons, 33% had no feedback of SSI rate; 60% believed in evidence for normothermia, wound edge protection, and use of alcohol solution, and reported use of these strategies. There was a discrepancy in the assumed evidence and use of hyperoxia, glove replacement after anastomosis, surgical tools replacement, and saline surgical site lavage. Most of respondents believe that oral antibiotic prophylaxis diminishes infection, but is indicated only by one third of them. Few surgeons believe in MBP, but many actually use it. Most surgeons believe that there is a discrepancy between published guidelines and actual clinical practice. As proper means to implement guidelines, checklists, standardized orders, surveillance, feedback of SSI rates, and educational programs are rated most highly by surgeons, but few of these are in place at their institutions. Conclusions: Gaps in the translation of evidence into practice remain in the prevention of SSI in colorectal surgical procedures. Several areas for improvement have been identified. Specific implementation strategies should be addressed in colorectal units.

Keywords: colorectal surgery; mechanical bowel preparation; oral antibiotic prophylaxis; prevention; surgical site infection.

Conflict of interest statement

No competing financial interests exist.

Figures

FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.
Infection prevention measures that demonstrated good concordance (less than 20% of difference) between surgeons' beliefs regarding evidence (positive or negative) and clinical practice patterns. Color image is available online.
FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.
Infection prevention measures that demonstrated discordance (more than 20% of difference) between surgeons' beliefs regarding evidence and clinical practice patterns. Color image is available online.
FIG. 3.
FIG. 3.
Surgeons' beliefs about oral antibiotic prophylaxis and mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) efficacy. Color image is available online.
FIG. 4.
FIG. 4.
Actual use of oral antibiotic prophylaxis of responding surgeons. MBP = mechanical bowel preparation). Color image is available online.
FIG. 5.
FIG. 5.
Actual use of mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) of responding surgeons. Color image is available online.
FIG. 6.
FIG. 6.
Intra-operative replacement of gloves. Color image is available online.
FIG. 7.
FIG. 7.
Surgical instrument replacement. Color image is available online.
FIG. 8.
FIG. 8.
Proportion of surgeons who believe the prevention strategies should be used and comparison with their actual implementation at their hospitals. WHO = World Health Organization; SSI = surgical site infection. Color image is available online.

References

    1. European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. Point prevalence survey of healthcare-associated infections and antimicrobial use in European acute care hospitals 2011–2012. Stockholm: ECDC; 2013. ECDC website. (Last accessed August13, 2017)
    1. Cao F, Li J, Li F. Mechanical bowel preparation for elective colorectal surgery: updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Colorectal Dis 2012;27:803–810
    1. Pujol M, Limón E, López-Contreras J, et al. . Surveillance of surgical site infections in elective colorectal surgery. Results of the VINCat Program (2007–2010). Enferm Infecc Microbiol Clin 2012;30(Suppl3):20–25
    1. Badia JM, Casey AL, Petrosillo N, et al. . Impact of surgical site infection on healthcare costs and patient outcomes: A systematic review in six European countries. J Hosp Infect 2017;96:1–15
    1. Shaw E, Gomila A, Piriz M, et al. . Cost of organ/space infection in elective colorectal surgery. Is it just a problem of rates? Antimicrob Resist Infect Control 2015;4(Suppl 1):P77
    1. Badia JM, Casey AL, Rubio-Pérez I, et al. . A survey to identify the breach between evidence and practice in the prevention of surgical infection: Time to take action. Int J Surg 2018;54:290–297
    1. Devane LA, Proud D, O'Connell PR, Panis Y. A European survey of bowel preparation in colorectal surgery. Colorectal Dis 2017;11:O402–O406
    1. Allegranzi B, Bischoff P, de Jonge S, et al. . New WHO recommendations on preoperative measures for surgical site infection prevention: An evidence-based global perspective. Lancet Infect Dis 2016;16:e276–e287
    1. Berríos-Torres SI, Umscheid CA, Bratzler DW, et al. . Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guideline for the prevention of surgical site infection, 2017. JAMA Surg 2017;152:784–791
    1. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Surgical Site Infection. Prevention and Treatment of Surgical Site Infection. National Institute for Clinical Excellence: London; 2008. NICE website. prevention-and treatment-975628422853. (Last accessed August13, 2017)
    1. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Surgical site infection. A summary of selected new evidence relevant to NICE clinical guideline 74 ‘Prevention and treatment of surgical site infection’ 2008. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence: London; 2013. NICE website. (Last accessed August13, 2017)
    1. Ministry of Health, Social Services and Equality. Clinical Practice Guideline for Surgical Patient Safety. Madrid; 2010. Ministry of Health, Social Services and Equality website. (Last accessed August13, 2017)
    1. The Canadian Patient Safety Institute. Prevent Surgical Site Infections. Getting Started Kit. Safer Healthcare Now. Canada: The Canadian Patient Safety Institute; 2014. CPSI website. (Last accessed August13, 2017)
    1. Anderson DJ, Podgorny K, Berríos-Torres SI, et al. . Strategies to prevent surgical site infections in acute care hospitals: 2014 update. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2014;35:605–627
    1. Health Protection Scotland. What are the key infection prevention and control recommendations to inform a surgical site infection (ISQ) prevention quality improvement tool?. Scotland: National Health Services Scotland; 2015. Health Protection Scotland website. (Last accessed August13, 2017)
    1. Badia JM, Arroyo-García N. Mechanical bowel preparation and oral antibiotic prophylaxis in colorectal surgery: Analysis and narrative review of scientific evidence. Cir Esp 2018;96:317–325
    1. Waters JA, Francone T, Marcello PW, et al. . Quality improvement initiatives in colorectal surgery: Value of physician feedback. Dis Colon Rectum 2017;60:213–218
    1. Sartelli M, Kluger Y, Ansaloni L, et al. . Knowledge, awareness, and attitude towards infection prevention and management among surgeons: Identifying the surgeon champion. World J Emerg Surg 2018;13:37.
    1. Roig JV, García-Fadrique A, García-Armengol J, et al. . Mechanical bowel preparation and antibiotic prophylaxis in colorectal surgery: Use by and opinions of Spanish surgeons. Colorectal Dis 2009;11:44–48
    1. Grimshaw JM, Shirran L, Thomas R, et al. . Changing provider behavior: An overview of systematic reviews of interventions. Med Care 2001;39(Suppl 2):II-S2–S45
    1. Eskicioglu C, Gagliardi AR, Fenech DS, et al. . Surgical site infection prevention: A survey to identify the gap between evidence and practice in University of Toronto teaching hospitals. Can J Surg 2012;55:233–238
    1. May C. Towards a general theory of implementation. Implement Sci 2013;8:18.
    1. Elwyn G, Legare F, van der Weijden T, et al. . Arduous implementation: Does the normalisation process model explain why it's so difficult to embed decision support technologies in routine clinical practice. Implement Sci 2008;3:57.
    1. Ricciardi BF, Bostrom MP, Lidgren L, et al. . Prevention of surgical site infection in total joint arthroplasty: An international tertiary care center survey. HSS J 2014;10:45–51
    1. Injean P, McKinnell JA, Hsiue PP, et al. . Survey of preoperative infection prevention for coronary artery bypass graft procedures. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2014;35:736–737
    1. Argani C, Notis E, Moseley R, et al. . Survey of Cesarean delivery infection prevention practices across US academic centers. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2015;36:1245–1247
    1. Adams AS, Soumerai SB, Lomas J, Ross-Degnan D. Evidence of self-report bias in assessing adherence to guidelines. Int J Qua1 Health Care 1999;11:187–192

Source: PubMed

3
Se inscrever