Download Free Medical Prevention of Surgical Site Infection Using An Evidence Based Bundled Approach PowerPoint Presentation

Prevention of Surgical Site Infection Using An Evidence Based Bundled Approach PowerPoint Presentation

DOWNLOAD MEDICAL POWERPOINT PRESENTATION

About This Presentation

Description : Check out this medical presentation on Surgical Site Infections, which is titled "Prevention of Surgical Site Infection Using An Evidence Based Bundled Approach", to know about the three key practices that perioperative nurses should assess during direct surgical case observations to prevent surgical site infections (SSIs), and the elements of the seven step bundle for SSI Prevention.

Tags : Surgical Site Infections, Prevention, Surgical Site Infection, Evidence Based Bundled Approach

Published on : Jul 05, 2021 | Views : 2711 | Downloads : 5

Shareable Url :

Embed Code :

Comment

Transcript

Slide 1-

Prevention of Surgical Site Infection Using An Evidence Based Bundled Approach Maureen Spencer, M.Ed, BSN, RN, CIC, FAPIC Infection Preventionist Consultant Boston, MA www.7sbundle.com www.workingtowardzero.com
Slide 2-

Faculty Disclosure Maureen P. Spencer, MEd, BSN, RN, CIC, FAPIC Speakers Bureau, Ethicon
Slide 3-

Objectives Describe three key practices that perioperative nurses should assess during direct surgical case observations to prevent surgical site infections (SSIs). List the elements of the seven step bundle for SSI Prevention. Develop a multidisciplinary team to implement the 7 S Bundle.
Slide 4-

Recent SSI Guidelines
Slide 5-

WHO Global Guidelines 2016
Slide 6-

Introduction First ever Global guidelines for the prevention of surgical site infection were published on 3 November 2016. Includes a list of 29 concrete recommendations distilled by 20 of the world’s leading experts from 26 reviews of the latest evidence. Recommendations have also been published in The Lancet Infectious Diseases Designed to address the increasing burden of health care-associated infections on both patients and health care systems globally, alongside supporting tools issued by WHO. WHO will continue to issue tools in support of guideline implementation throughout 2017.
Slide 7-

Evidence Based Resource: Updated SSI Prevention Guidelines – WHO 2016 Screening and nasal mupirocin recommended for S aureus colonized patients before total joint and cardiac procedures. Combination of mechanical and oral antibiotic prep is recommended for elective colorectal surgery. Alcohol based chlorhexidine and iodophor solutions for skin prep Antimicrobial sealants should not be used after skin prep (“Integuseal”) Plastic adhesive incise drapes with or without antimicrobial properties should not be used for SSI prevention (although a 2015 October prospective study with propensity match of 808 cardiac surgery patients/group: Iodine drape resulted in statistically significant reduced SSI (6.5 vs. 1.9) (p=0.001) Use of impervious plastic wound protector can prevent SSI in open abdominal surgery Triclosan-coated suture is recommended in any type of surgical procedure Do not use antibiotic irrigation solution (Post op) negative pressure wound therapy recommended in high risk wounds
Slide 8-

J Am Coll Surg. Vol 224, No 1 January 2017
Slide 9-

ppt slide no 9 content not found
Slide 10-

ppt slide no 10 content not found
Slide 11-

ppt slide no 11 content not found
Slide 12-

ppt slide no 12 content not found
Slide 13-

ppt slide no 13 content not found
Slide 14-

Organisms and SSIs
Slide 15-

Weiner L, et al. NHSN 2011-2014 Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2016;37:1288–1301 Distribution and Rank Order of Pathogens Frequently Reported to the National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) – Surgical Site Infections
Slide 16-

Pathogens survive on surfaces 1. Beard-Pegler et al. 1988.. J Med Microbiol. 26:251-5. 2. BIOQUELL trials, unpublished data. 3. Bonilla et al. 1996. Infect Cont Hosp Epidemiol. 17:770-2 4. Boyce. 2007. J Hosp Infect. 65:50-4. 5. Duckworth and Jordens. 1990. J Med Microbiol. 32:195-200. 6. French et al. 2004. ICAAC. 7. Kramer et al. 2006. BMC Infect Dis. 6:130. 8. Otter and French. 2009. J Clin Microbiol. 47:205-7. 9. Smith et al. 1996. J Med. 27: 293-302. 10. Wagenvoort et al. 2000. J Hosp Infect. 45:231-4. 11. Wagenvoort and Joosten. 2002. J Hosp Infect. 52:226-7.
Slide 17-

Prior room occupancy increases risk of HAI 1. Martinez et al. Arch Intern Med 2003; 163: 1905-12. 2. Huang et al. Arch Intern Med 2006; 166: 1945-51. 3. Drees et al. Clin Infect Dis 2008; 46: 678-85. 4. Shaughnessy. ICAAC/IDSA 2008. Abstract K-4194. 5. Nseir et al. Clin Microbiol Infect 2010
Slide 18-

Mortality risk is high among patients with SSIs A patient with an SSI is: 5x more likely to be readmitted after discharge1 2x more likely to spend time in intensive care1 2x more likely to die after surgery1 The mortality risk is higher when SSI is due to MRSA A patient with MRSA is 12x more likely to die after surgery2 18 WHO Guidelines for Safe Surgery 2009. Engemann JJ et al. Clin Infect Dis. 2003;36:592-598.
Slide 19-

19 Special Risk Population: Orthopedic Implants Hip or Knee aspiration If positive – irrigation and debridement Removal of hardware may be necessary Insertion of antibiotic spacers Revisions at future date Long term IV antibiotics in community or rehab Future worry about the joint In other words – DEVASTATING FOR THE PATIENT AND SURGEON
Slide 20-

A 7 S Bundle Approach to Preventing Surgical Site Infections
Slide 21-

7 “S” Bundle to Prevent SSI www.7sbundle.com SAFETY – Safe OPERATING ROOM SCREEN - Screening for risk factors and presence of MRSA & MSSA SKIN PREP – Skin preparation with alcohol based antiseptics, such as CHG/alcohol or Iodophor/alcohol SHOWERS – Shower - with soap or chlorhexidine - night before and morning of surgery SOLUTION - Surgical Irrigation prior to closure to remove exogenous contaminants – use of chlorhexidine irrigant vs antibiotic irrigations SUTURES – Suture closure with Triclosan coated antimicrobial sutures SKIN CLOSURE – Skin adhesive to seal incision and/or antimicrobial dressing to prevent exogenous contamination in post-op period
Slide 22-

#1 Safe Operating Room
Slide 23-

#1 – Is it a Safe Operating Room? Traffic control, number staff in room Air handling systems: filtration, cleaning of grills, temps, humidity Evaluate forced air warmer hose placement and heater cooler maintenance for air current transmission SCIP: hair clipping, warmers, oxygenation, surgical prophylaxis, Foley catheter removal < 48 hrs Room turnover and terminal cleaning procedures Surgical technique and handling of tissues Instrument cleaning/sterilization process, biological indicators, ultrasonic washer Storage of supplies, supply bins, carts, tables, OR equipment AORN Gap Analysis for Environmental Disinfection 2017
Slide 24-

AORN 2017 Guidelines related to Infection Prevention www.aorn.org – evidence based guidelines Aseptic Practice Patient Skin Antisepsis Environmental Cleaning Hand Hygiene in the Perioperative Setting Surgical attire Sterile Technique Patient and Worker Safety Sharps Safety Transmissible Infections Environment of Care Sterilization and Disinfection Flexible Endoscopes High Level Disinfection Instrument Cleaning Packaging Systems Sterilization
Slide 25-

Surgical Care Improvement Program (SCIP) 1. Surgical prophylaxis: selection, time, discontinuation of abx (24hrs or 48hrs cardiac) 2. Hair clippers AORN Guideline: Patient Skin Antisepsis ii. Recommendation II.b.1, page 56 - The patient’s hair should be removed in a location outside the operating or procedure room 3. Warming patient (pre-op, post-op) for cell function and wound healing 4. Increased oxygen – for wound healing 5. Remove Foley catheter within 48 hours https://manual.jointcommission.org/releases/archive/TJC2010B/SurgicalCareImprovementProject.html
Slide 26-

Challenges with Hair Clipping in OR Clipping should always be done outside of the OR whenever possible Removal of stray hairs from clipping should be done using current methods (tape and/or suction), while clipping on top of a disposable underpad Remove and dispose of single-use clipper head immediately after use and clean the clipper unit according to manufacturer instructions before storing In cases of excessive amounts of hair, use vacuum assisted suction device and associated single-use disposable tubing
Slide 27-

ppt slide no 27 content not found
Slide 28-

Surgical attire – Head Covering Boyce, Evidence in Support of Covering the Hair of OR Personnel AORN Journal ● Jan 2014 Spruce L. Surgical Head Coverings: A Literature Review AORN Journal October 2017 Normal individuals shed more than 10 million particles from their skin every day. Approximately 10% of skin squames carry viable microorganisms Estimated that individuals shed approximately 1 million microorganisms from their bodies each day Personnel entering the semi-restricted and restricted areas should cover the head, hair, ears, and facial hair A clean surgical head cover or hood that confines all hair and completely covers the ears, scalp skin, sideburns, and nape of the neck should be worn. Personnel wearing scrub attire should not remove the surgical head covering when leaving the perioperative area Personnel should remove surgical head coverings whenever they change into street clothes and go outside of the building. Reusable head coverings should be laundered in a healthcare accredited laundry facility after each daily use and when contaminated
Slide 29-

Sleeved Scrub or Jacket in Restricted Areas In restricted areas, all non-scrubbed personnel should completely cover their arms with a long-sleeved scrub top or jacket Cover the arms while performing preoperative patient skin antisepsis. Sterile processing team member should wear scrub attire that covers the arms while preparing and packaging items in the clean assembly section of the sterile processing area. Long-sleeved jackets and scrub attire tops should fit closely to the arms and torso to prevent the jacket or top from potentially contaminating the surgical site during preoperative patient skin antisepsis or other activities (eg, application of surgical dressings). Snapped closed or buttoned up the front Perioperative personnel should change into street clothes whenever they go outside of the building AORN Guideline – Surgical Attire 2017
Slide 30-

Environmental cleaning Evaluate between room cleaning procedures Terminal cleaning procedures on evening/night shift Are there sufficient staff to terminally clean all OR rooms? Microfiber cloths versus sanicloths Microfiber mops versus string mops Evaluate contact time for disinfectants Consider UV room disinfection during terminal cleaning AORN Guideline: Environmental Cleaning
Slide 31-

New Technology for OR Environmental Disinfection Movable UV-C robots for OR terminal cleaning Copper surfaces Disinfecting Ceiling Light Units Movable air treatment system with HEPA filer and UV Permanent fixture white light disinfection Spencer M, et al: A model for choosing an automated ultraviolet-C disinfection system and building a case for the C-suite: Two case reports. AJIC 2016 24/7 air purification with UV light
Slide 32-

Challenges: Cleaning/Sterilization of Instruments Inspection/cleaning of Instruments Lumens, grooves, sorting, hand cleaning, disassembly Ultrasonic washers in SPD machine quality monitor (Sonacheck) routine cleaning and maintenance Pre-soaking and rinsing of tissue and blood from the instruments in enzymatic or instrument cleaner Reduce immediate use steam sterilization (IUSS) - purchase additional instruments and trays Use new separate instruments for closing colorectal cases based on expert consensus 32 AORN Guideline – Cleaning and Care of Surgical Instruments
Slide 33-

AORN Hand Hygiene Guideline Organisms multiply every 20 minutes Communication to pass R Factors to antibiotic resistance III.a. Personnel should perform hand hygiene before and after patient contact before performing a clean or sterile task after risk for blood or body fluid exposure after contact with patient surroundings when hands are visibly soiled before and after eating after using the restroom Changing gloves prior to closure for colorectal cases based on expert consensus Communication between organisms to pass resistance factors AORN Guideline – Hand Hygiene
Slide 34-

ppt slide no 34 content not found
Slide 35-

?antibiotic resistant strains
Slide 36-

ppt slide no 36 content not found
Slide 37-

Risk: Cross Contamination and Biofilm Formation on implanted material: orthopedic implants, devices, stopcocks, catheters, grafts, mesh, etc.
Slide 38-

Abdominal Wound Protector/Retractor for Colon Surgery Shown to Reduce SSI Horiuchi et al: A Wound Protector Shields Incision Sites from Bacterial Invasion SURGICAL INFECTIONS Volume 11, Number 6, 2010 Reid et al: Barrier Wound Protection Decreases Surgical Site Infection in Open Elective Colorectal Surgery: A Randomized Clinical Trial DISEASES OF THE COLON & RECTUM VOLUME 53: 10 (2010) www.stopwoundinfection.com WHO SSI Guideline
Slide 39-

#2 SCREEN for Risk Factors and MRSA and MSSA Colonization
Slide 40-

Staph Nasal Colonization: MRSA and MSSA Staphylococcus aureus nasal colonization predisposes patients to invasive S. aureus infections Nasal carriage of S. aureus is associated with a relative risk of 7.1 for developing SSI (Kluytmans J Infect Dis 1995) Most cases of invasive S. aureus infection are due to endogenous strains (Von Eiff NEJM 2001, Huang CID 2008)
Slide 41-

Everheart JS et al. Medical comorbidities are independent preoperative risk factors for surgical infections after total joint arthroplasty. Clin orthoped relat res. March22, 2013 online pub
Slide 42-

Does Using Mupirocin Eradicate S. Aureus Nasal Carriage? Systematic review (Ammerlaan HS, et al. CID 2009): 8 studies comparing mupirocin to placebo Short-term nasal mupirocin (4-7 days) was an effective method for S. aureus eradication 90% success at one week, 60% at longer (14-365 days) follow-up 1% develop mupirocin resistance
Slide 43-

43
Slide 44-

0.18% 0.06% 0.26% 0.13% 50% Reduction in MSSA SSI 60% Reduction in MRSA SSI MRSA SSI Rate MSSA SSI Rate 10/01/05-07/16/06 07/17/06-09/30/07 10/01/05-07/16/06 07/17/06-09/30/07
Slide 45-

45 SSI– Increased Risk with MRSA Colonization MRSA colonized patients still had an increased risk of SSI despite decolonization Seven (7) Staph aureus infections in 2712 positives 0.19% Seven (7) MRSA infections in the 576 positives 1.21% Statistically significant difference p=<.05 0.19% 1.21%
Slide 46-

Institutional Prescreening for Detection and Elimination of Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus aureus in Patients Undergoing Elective Orthopaedic Surgery Kim DH, Spencer M, Davidson SM, et al. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2010;92:1820-1826
Slide 47-

Alcohol Based and Iodophor Based Nasal Antiseptics
Slide 48-

Nasal decolonization with Alcohol and Iodohor Nasal Antiseptics Anderson MJ et al. Efficacy of skin and nasal povidone-iodine preparation against MRSA and S. aureus within the anterior nares. 2015 Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 59 (5), pp. 2765-2773. Steed LL, Costello J, Lohia S, Spannhake EW, Nguyen S. Reduction of nasal Staphylococcus aureus carriage in health care professional by treatment with a non-antibiotic alcohol-based nasal antiseptic. 2014 American Journal of Infection Control 42 (8), pp 841-846 Pre- and Post-Operative Participation of Orthopedic Patients and Surgical Staff in a Novel Intervention to Reduce Staphylococcus aureus infection. ID Week Poster October 27, 2016 69% decrease in SSI during the 9-month study period Preventing Surgical Site Infections: A Randomized, Open-Label Trial of Nasal Mupirocin Ointment and Nasal Povidone-Iodine Solution. Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology, Vol. 35, No. 7 (July 2014), pp. 826-832 - Reduction in SSI after arthroplasty or spine fusion Mullen A, et al. Perioperative participation of orthopedic patients and surgical staff in a nasal decolonization intervention to reduce Staphylococcus spp surgical site infections AJIC Mar 2017 Mean infection rates were significantly decreased by 81% from 1.76 to 0.33 per 100 surgeries during the 15-month trial (alcohol based nasal antiseptic)
Slide 49-

#3 – Showers with Soap or Chlorhexidine gluconate
Slide 50-

Risk Factors: Bacteria on Patient’s Skin 2017 AORN Guideline for Preoperative Patient Skin Antisepsis: Recommendation I, page 53 - Patients should bathe or shower before surgery with either soap or an antiseptic. If using CHG cleansing: Liquid chlorhexidine shower (two 4 oz bottles – night before and morning of surgery) CHG impregnated washcloths (package of 6 cloths) 50
Slide 51-

Liquid chlorhexidine shower (two 4oz bottles – night before and morning of surgery) – leave on skin for 1 minute in shower before rinsing
Slide 52-

#4 Skin Prep – Alcohol based surgical skin prep
Slide 53-

Alcohol-containing antiseptic agent Two types of preoperative skin preparations that combine alcohol (which has an immediate and dramatic killing effect on skin bacteria) with long-acting antimicrobial agents appear to be more effective at preventing SSI than povidone-iodine (an iodophor) alone: Chlorhexidine 2% plus alcohol 70% Iodophor plus alcohol 72% 3 minute dry time for alcohol antiseptics to prevent fire 53 AORN Guideline for Preoperative Patient Skin Antisepsis
Slide 54-

Skin Antiseptic Agents
Slide 55-

# 5 Sutures –Triclosan-coated antimicrobial
Slide 56-

Nov 2016
Slide 57-

Bacterial colonization of suture Like all foreign bodies, sutures can be colonized by bacteria: Implants provide nidus for attachment of bacteria Bacterial colonization can lead to biofilm formation Biofilm formation increases the difficulty of treating an infection1 57 On an implant, such as a suture, it takes only 100 staphylococci per gram of tissue for an SSI to develop2 Edmiston C, et al. Microbiology of Explanted Suture Segments from Infected and Noninfected Surgical Patients. Journal of Clinical Microbiology. February 2013 Volume 51 Number 2 p. 417–421 Mangram AJ et al. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol.1999;27:97-134.. Contamination Colonization Biofilm Formation
Slide 58-

OR Air Current Contamination – End of the Case In teaching hospitals: Surgeon leaves room Resident, Physician Assistant or Nurse Practitioner work on incision Circulating Nurse counts sponges Scrub Technician preparing instruments for Central Sterile Processing Anesthesia move in and out of room Instrument representative Students and Visitors
Slide 59-

Suture with Staphylococcus colonies Air settling plates in the operating room at the last hour of a total joint case from the anesthesia cart, bovie cart, computer Potential for Contamination of Sutures Spencer et al: Reducing the Risk of Orthopedic Infections: The Role of Innovative Suture Technology. NAON 2010 Annual Congress - May 15-19, 2010
Slide 60-

Antibacterial Suture Challenge Studied the “zone of inhibition” around the suture A pure culture—0.5 McFarland Broth—of S. aureus was prepared on a culture plate An antibacterial suture was aseptically cut, planted on the culture plate, and incubated for 24 hrs – held at 5 and 10 days 60 5 day zone of inhibition 10 day zone of inhibition Traditional suture Antimicrobial suture Spencer et al: Reducing the Risk of Orthopedic Infections: The Role of Innovative Suture Technology NAON 2010 Annual Congress - May 15-19, 2010
Slide 61-

ppt slide no 61 content not found
Slide 62-

#6 Solution – to Pollution is Dilution
Slide 63-

63 Antibiotic Irrigation – Limited Evidence High-pressure pulsatile lavage and low-pressure pulsatile lavage result in higher rates of deep bacterial seeding in bone than does brush and bulb-syringe lavage1 Higher irrigant pressures result in greater osseous damage and perhaps impairment of osseous healing1 Kalteis et al. revealed that compared with brush and bulb-syringe lavage high and low-pressure pulsatile lavage resulted in significantly (p < 0.001) higher rates of deep bacterial seeding in bone2 No evidence that Bacitracin/Polymixin irrigations reduce rate of SSI2 1. Kalteis T, Lehn N, Schroder HJ, Schubert T, Zysk S, Handel M, Grifka J. Contaminant seeding in bone by different irrigation methods: an experimental study. J Orthop Trauma. 2005;19:591-6. 2. Fletcher N, et al: Prevention of perioperative infections. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89:1605-1618
Slide 64-

ppt slide no 64 content not found
Slide 65-

Chlorhexidine 0.05% Irrigation Solution Chlorhexidine Gluconate 0.05% is an excellent biocide that binds to tissues It has demonstrated antimicrobial efficacy and persistence in laboratory testing The mechanical action effectively loosens and removes wound debris Safe for mucous membranes – cleared by FDA
Slide 66-

ppt slide no 66 content not found
Slide 67-

Flush contaminants before closure CHG Irrigant leaves a persistent antimicrobial action in the tissue Fry D. Topical Antimicrobials and the Open Surgical Wound Surg Infec Vol 17, No 5 2016
Slide 68-

ppt slide no 68 content not found
Slide 69-

AORN #138 Boston April, 2017
Slide 70-

#7 Skin Adhesive – Care of the Incision
Slide 71-

Challenges in the Post-op Incisions 71 Incision collects fluid – serum, blood - growth medium for organisms – small dehiscence Spine fusions -incisions close to the buttocks or neck Body fluid contamination from bedpans/commodes Heavy perspiration common with obese patients Friction and sliding - skin tears and blisters Itchy skin - due to pain medications - skin breakdown
Slide 72-

Cesarean Delivery: Sutures vs Staples Prospective, randomized study of 435 c-section patients1 197 patients: staples 219 patients: 4-0 MONOCRYL™ (poliglecaprone 25) Suture on PS2 needle Wound separation rate: 17% (staples) vs. 5 % (sutures) Wound complication rate: 22% (staples) vs. 9% (sutures) Staple closure was a significant independent risk factor for wound separation after adjustment for all other factors (GDM, BMI >30, incision type, etc) Meta-analysis of 6 studies with a total of 1487 c-section patients2 803 patients: staples 684 patients: subcuticular suture closure Staple closure was associated with a two-fold increase in risk of wound infection or separation Bash et al. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010;203:285.e1. Tuuli et al. Obset Gynecol. 2011;117:682.
Slide 73-

British Medical Journal – March 2010 online
Slide 74-

Consider Topical Skin Adhesive Wounds are most vulnerable to infection in the first 48-72 hours1 Until the epithelial barrier is complete (usually within 48 hours) wounds are solely dependent on the wound closure device to maintain integrity1 The extent of microbial protection depends on barrier integrity1 Effective barriers must maintain their integrity for the first 48 hours Incisional adhesive provides a strong microbial barrier that prevents bacteria from entering the incision site2 74 Fine and Musto. Wound healing. In: Mulholland et al. Greenfield’s Surgery: Scientific Principles and Practice. 4th ed. 2005. Bhende et al. Surg Infect (Larchmt). 2002;3:251-257.
Slide 75-

Topical Skin Adhesive: Risk Reduction For Hospital Staff No time spent removing staples or sutures Reduces number of suture set ups Simplifies post-op wound checks Reduces number of wound dressings Can reduce staff suture exposures For Patients 7 days of wound healing strength1 A microbial barrier with 99% effectiveness for 72 hours in vitro1 Shower immediately Outstanding cosmesis Reduced follow-up Less pain and anxiety 75 1DERMABOND ADVANCED® Topical Skin Adhesive has been shown to seal out gram-positive, gram-negative, and drug-resistant (MRSA, MRSE) bacteria that may lead to infection. Bhende S, Rothenburger S, Spangler DJ, Dito M. In vitro assessment of microbial barrier properties of DERMABOND® Topical Skin Adhesive. Surg Infect (Larchmt). 2002;3:251-257.
Slide 76-

C Section 6 Weeks Post-op and Beyond
Slide 77-

Incisional Adhesive on Total Knee Independent research – New England Baptist Hospital, Boston, MA 2010
Slide 78-

Clinical Use of Incisional Adhesive in Total Joints Knee: Sealed with incisional adhesive, covered with Telfa and a transparent dressing for incision protection Healed incision Hip: Sealed with adhesive covered with gauze and transparent dressing for incision protection Independent research- Lead researcher: Maureen Spencer – New England Baptist Hospital, Boston, MA 2009
Slide 79-

Incisional Adhesive and Total Shoulder Replacements Propionibacterium acnes related total shoulder infections (TSR) Eliminated the use of staples for TSR Instituted the use of incisional adhesive Covered dressing until day of discharge for protection Independent research- Lead researcher: Maureen Spencer – New England Baptist Hospital, Boston, MA 2009
Slide 80-

Which Would You Prefer??? Topical Incisional Adhesive (TSA) Octyl Cyanoacrylate Prineo Skin Closure System
Slide 81-

Other Options To Consider when adhesives are contraindicated
Slide 82-

Antimicrobial (PHMB) Dressings with Hypoallergenic Fabric Tape Spencer et al: The Use of Antimicrobial Gauze Dressing (AMD) After Orthopedic Surgery To Reduce Surgical Site Infections NAON 2010 Annual Congress - May 15-19, 2010
Slide 83-

Antimicrobial Silver Dressings Silver dressing and transparent dressing left on until discharge or up to 7 days postop – seals the incision from exogenous contaminants NAON – May 2006 Spencer et al: The Use of A Silver Gauze Dressing in Spine Surgery to Reduce the Incidence of MRSA Surgical Site Infections
Slide 84-

In Conclusion…..
Slide 85-

Many Risk Factors Influence SSI – Fishbone Diagram 14 One thing could lead to the failure
Slide 86-

86 Establish a Multidisciplinary Team The team representatives OR nursing, CSS, Surgeons & Anesthesia, Managers from infection control, healthcare quality, facilities and environmental services Evaluate Procedures and Practices Facility design and Environment of Care Issues Patient Risk Factors Infection Rates Innovative Infection Prevention Products and Practices Spencer M, et al. A Multidisciplnary Team Working Toward Zero Infection Rate. Poster presented AORN 2006; March 19-23, 2006; Washington DC
Slide 87-

“Zero Harm” Teams – Patient Safety Council Senior leadership and surgeons – must be involved and lead the effort Structured program with clearly defined goal of zero tolerance for HAIs Communication – effective and consistent Ongoing and creative education Financial support to Infection Prevention program Use process improvement tools (fishbone, pareto, mind-mapping) to engage key stakeholders and staff 87
Slide 88-

ppt slide no 88 content not found
Slide 89-

Evidence-based References Smith T, et al. Sutures versus staples for skin closure in orthopaedic surgery: meta-analysis. BMJ 2010;340:c1199 Singh A, et al. An Economic Model: Value of Antimicrobial-Coated Sutures to Society, Hospitals, and ThirdParty Payers in Preventing Abdominal Surgical Site Infections. Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology, Vol. 35, No. 8 (August 2014), pp. 10131020 Tuuli M, et al. Staples Compared to Subcuticular Suture for Skin Closure After Cesarean Delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2011;117:682-90. Daoud F, et al Meta-Analysis of Prevention of Surgical Site Infections following Incision Closure with Triclosan-Coated Sutures: Robustness to New Evidence. Surgical Infections 2014. Edmiston C, et al. Microbiology of Explanted Suture Segments from Infected and Noninfected Surgical Patients. 2013, 51(2):417. DOI:J. Clin. Microbiol. November 2012. 10.1128/JCM.02442-12. Apisarnthanarak A, et al. Triclosan-Coated Sutures Reduce the Risk of Surgical Site Infections: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2015;36(2):1–11 Eymann R, et al. Glue Instead of Stitches: A Minor Change of the Operative Technique with a Serious Impact on the Shunt Infection Rate. Brain Edema XIV, Acta Neurochirurgica Supplementum Vol. 106,DOI 10.1007/978-3-211-98811-4_14. Chambers A, et al. Is skin closure with cyanoacrylate glue effective for the prevention of sternal wound infections? Interact CardioVasc Thorac Surg 2010;10:793-796. Silvestri A, et al. Octyl-2-Cyanoacrylate Adhesive for Skin Closure and Prevention of Infection in Plastic Surgery. Aesth. Plast. Surg. 30:695699, 2006 Fletcher N, Sofianos D, Berkes M, Obremskey W. Prevention of Perioperative Infection. J Bone Joint Surg A. 2007;89:1605-18 Emori TG, Culver DH, Horan TC, Jarvis WR, White JW, Olson DR, (NNIS): Description of surveillance methods. Am J Infect Control 1991;19:19-35 Bratzler DW. Houck PM. Richards C. Steele L. Dellinger EP. Fry DE. Wright C. Ma A. Carr K. Red L. Use of antimicrobial prophylaxis for major surgery: baseline results from the National Surgical Infection Prevention Project. Archives of Surgery. 140(2):174-82, 2005 Feb Leaper D. Effects of local and systemic warming on postoperative infections. Surgical Infections. 7 Suppl 2:S101-3, 2006 Greif R. Akca O. Horn EP. Kurz A. Sessler DI. Supplemental perioperative oxygen to reduce the incidence of surgical-wound infection. Outcomes Research Group. New England Journal of Medicine. 342(3):161-7, 2000 Jan 20 Latham R. Lancaster AD. Covington JF. Pirolo JS. Thomas CS. The association of diabetes and glucose control with surgical-site infections among cardiothoracic surgery patients. Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology. 22(10):607-12, 2001 Oct Edmiston CE. Seabrook GR. Goheen MP. Krepel CJ. Johnson CP. Lewis BD. Brown KR. Towne JB. Bacterial adherence to surgical sutures: can antibacterial-coated sutures reduce the risk of microbial contamination?. Journal of the American College of Surgeons. 203(4):481-9, 2006 Oct
Slide 90-

Evidence-based References Davis KA, Stewart JJ, Crouch HK, Florez CE, Hospenthal DR. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) nares colonization at hospital admission and its effect on subsequent MRSA infection. Clin Infect Dis 2004; 39:77682 Kim DH, Spencer M, Davidson SM, et al. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2010;92:1820-1826 Boyce, Evidence in Support of Covering the Hair of OR Personnel AORN Journal, Jan 2014 Loftus R, et al. Hand Contamination of Anesthesia Providers is an Important Risk Factor for Intraoperative Bacterial Transmission. Anesth Analg 2011; 112:98-105 ASHP 2013 Surgical Prophylaxis Guidelines 2013 Spencer et al: Reducing the Risk of Orthopedic Infections: The Role of Innovative Suture Technology NAON 2010 Annual Congress - May 15-19, 2010 Everheart JC at al. Medical Comorbidities are Independent Risk Factors for Surgical Site Infections After Total Joint Arthroplasty. Clin Orthoped Relat Res. March 22 2013 Spencer M, et al. A Multidisciplnary Team Working Toward Zero Infection Rate. Poster presented AORN 2006; March 19-23, 2006; Washington DC Pritish T, et al. Outbreak of Pseudomonas aeruginosa Surgical Site Infections after Arthroscopic Procedures: Texas, 2009 Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology, Vol. 32, No. 12 (December 2011), pp.1179-1186 Institute for Healthcare Improvement: How-to Guide:Prevent Surgical Site Infections. Jan 2012 Spencer et al: The Use of A Silver Gauze Dressing in Spine Surgery to Reduce the Incidence of MRSA Surgical Site Infections. NAON Poster Presentation May 2016 Daoud C, Edmiston C, et al. Meta-Analysis of Prevention of Surgical Site Infections following Incision Closure with Triclosan-Coated Sutures:Robustness to New Evidence Surgery 2013;154:89-100 Barnes S, Spencer M. Surgical wound irrigation: A call for evidence-based standardization of practice. American Journal of Infection Control 42 (2014) 525-9 Wang Z, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of triclosan-coated sutures for the prevention of surgical-site infection. British Journal of Surgery 2013 Edmiston C, et al. Empowering the Surgical Patient: A Randomized, Prospective Analysis of an Innovative Strategy for Improving Patient Compliance with Preadmission Showering ProtocolAm Coll Surg 2014;-:1e9. 2014 Edmiston C, et al. Microbiology of Explanted Suture Segments from Infected and Noninfected Surgical Patients. Journal of Clinical Microbiology. February 2013 Volume 51 Number 2 p. 417–421 Mangram AJ, et al. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1999; 27: 97-134 Ammerlaan H, et al. Eradication of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus carriage: a systematic review. Clin Infect Dis. 2009 Apr 1;48(7):922-30..
Slide 91-

Thank you