We performed a return-on-investment analysis comparing the investment in surgical site infection (SSI) prevention programs in a hospital setting to the savings from averted SSI cases.

A retrospective case costing study using aggregated patient data to determine the incidence and costs of SSI infection in surgical departments over time. We calculated return on investment to the hospital and conducted several sensitivity and scenario analyses.

Data were compiled for the Ottawa Hospital (TOH), a Canadian tertiary-care teaching institution.

We used aggregated records for all hospital patients who underwent surgical procedures between April 2010 and January 2015.

We estimated the potential cost savings of the hospital’s surgical quality improvement program, namely the Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) and the Comprehensive Unit-based Safety Program (CUSP).

From 2010 to 2016, TOH invested C$826,882 (US$624,384) in surgical quality improvement programs targeting SSI incidence and accrued C$1,885,110 (US$1,423,460) in cumulative savings from averted SSI cases, generating a return of $2.28 (US$3.02) per dollar invested (95% confidence interval [CI], −0.67 to 7.37). The study findings are sensitive to the estimated cost to the hospital per SSI case and the rate reduction attributable to the prevention program.

The NSQIP and CUSP have produced a positive return on investment at TOH; however, the result rests on several assumptions. This positive return on investment is expected to continue if the hospital can continue to reduce SSI incidence at least 0.25% annually without new investments. Findings from this study highlight the need for continuous program evaluation of the quality improvement initiatives.

Rising antibiotic resistance could reduce the effectiveness of antibiotics in preventing postoperative infections. We investigated trends in the efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis regimens for 3 commonly performed surgical procedures—appendectomy, cesarean section, and colorectal surgery—and 1 invasive diagnostic procedure, transrectal prostate biopsy (TRPB).

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

We searched PubMed and Cochrane databases (through October 31, 2017) for randomized control trials (RCTs) that measured the efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis for 4 index procedures in preventing postoperative infections (surgical site infections [SSIs] following the 3 surgical procedures and a combination of urinary tract infections [UTIs] and sepsis following TRPB).

Of 399 RCTs, 74 studies (9 appendectomy, 11 cesarean section, 39 colorectal surgery, and 15 TRPB) were included. Multilevel logistic regression models with random intercepts for each study showed no statistically significant increase in SSIs over time for appendectomy (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] per year, 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.92–1.16; P=.57), cesarean section (aOR per year, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.96–1.05; P=.80), and TRPB (aOR per year, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.77–1.18; P=.67). However, there was a significant increase in SSIs proportion following colorectal surgery (aOR per year, 1.049; 95% CI, 1.03–1.07; P<.001).

The efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis agents in preventing SSIs following colorectal surgery has declined. Small number of RCTs and low infections rates limited our ability to assess true effect for simple appendectomy, cesarean section, or TRPB.

Current practice guidelines recommend cefazolin, cefoxitin, cefotetan, or ampicillin-sulbactam as first-line antibiotic prophylaxis in hysterectomy. We undertook this systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to determine whether cefazolin, with limited antianaerobic spectrum, is as effective in preventing surgical site-infection (SSI) as the other first-choice antimicrobials that have more extensive antianaerobic activity.

We searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Central, and EMBASE for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCT) in any language up to January 23, 2018. We only included trials that measured SSI (our primary outcome) defined as superficial, deep, or organ space. We excluded trials of β-lactams no longer in clinical use.

In terms of SSI incidence, cefazolin use was not inferior to its comparator in 12 of 13 individual RCTs included in the analysis. The meta-analysis summary estimate showed a significantly higher SSI risk with cefazolin versus cefoxitin or cefotetan (risk ratio, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.04–2.77; P = .03). However, most studies included nonstandardized dosing and duration of antimicrobial prophylaxis, had indeterminate or high risk of bias, did not include patients with gynecological malignancies, and/or were older RCTs not reflective of current clinical practices.

Due to inherent limitations associated with old RCTs with limited relevance to contemporary surgery, an RCT of cefazolin versus regimens with significant antianaerobic spectrum is needed to establish the optimal choice for SSI prevention in hysterectomy.

To describe the epidemiology of surgical site infections (SSIs) after pediatric ambulatory surgery.

Observational cohort study with 60 days follow-up after surgery.

The study took place in 3 ambulatory surgical facilities (ASFs) and 1 hospital-based facility in a single pediatric healthcare network.

Children <18 years undergoing ambulatory surgery were included in the study. Of 19,777 eligible surgical encounters, 8,502 patients were enrolled.

Data were collected through parental interviews and from chart reviews. We assessed 2 outcomes: (1) National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN)–defined SSI and (2) evidence of possible infection using a definition developed for this study.

We identified 21 NSHN SSIs for a rate of 2.5 SSIs per 1,000 surgical encounters: 2.9 per 1,000 at the hospital-based facility and 1.6 per 1,000 at the ASFs. After restricting the search to procedures completed at both facilities and adjustment for patient demographics, there was no difference in the risk of NHSN SSI between the 2 types of facilities (odds ratio, 0.7; 95% confidence interval, 0.2–2.3). Within 60 days after surgery, 404 surgical patients had some or strong evidence of possible infection obtained from parental interview and/or chart review (rate, 48 SSIs per 1,000 surgical encounters). Of 306 cases identified through parental interviews, 176 cases (57%) did not have chart documentation. In our multivariable analysis, older age and black race were associated with a reduced risk of possible infection.

The rate of NHSN-defined SSI after pediatric ambulatory surgery was low, although a substantial additional burden of infectious morbidity related to surgery might not have been captured by standard surveillance strategies and definitions.

To evaluate the efficacy of multiple ultraviolet (UV) light decontamination devices in a radiology procedure room.

Laboratory evaluation.

We compared the efficacy of 8 UV decontamination devices with a 4-minute UV exposure time in reducing recovery of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE), and Clostridium difficile spores on steel disk carriers placed at 5 sites on a computed tomography patient table. Analysis of variance was used to compare reductions for the different devices. A spectrometer was used to obtain irradiance measurements for the devices.

Four standard vertical tower low-pressure mercury devices achieved 2 log10CFU or greater reductions in VRE and MRSA and ~1 log10CFU reductions in C. difficile spores, whereas a pulsed-xenon device resulted in less reduction in the pathogens (P<.001). In comparison to the vertical tower low-pressure mercury devices, equal or greater reductions in the pathogens were achieved by 3 nonstandard low-pressure mercury devices that included either adjustable bulbs that could be oriented directly over the exam table, a robotic base allowing movement along the side of the table during operation, or 3 vertical towers operated simultaneously. The low-pressure mercury devices produced primarily UV-C light, whereas the pulsed-xenon device produced primarily UV-A and UV-B light. The time required to move the devices from the corner of the room and set up for operation varied from 18 to 59 seconds.

Many currently available UV devices could provide an effective and efficient adjunct to manual cleaning and disinfection in radiology procedure rooms.

To determine the efficacy of 2 types of antimicrobial privacy curtains in clinical settings and the costs involved in replacing standard curtains with antimicrobial curtains.

A prospective, open-labeled, multicenter study with a follow-up duration of 6 months.

This study included 12 rooms of patients with multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) (668 patient bed days) and 10 cubicles (8,839 patient bed days) in the medical, surgical, neurosurgical, orthopedics, and rehabilitation units of 10 hospitals.

Culture samples were collected from curtain surfaces twice a week for 2 weeks, followed by weekly intervals.

With a median hanging time of 173 days, antimicrobial curtain B (quaternary ammonium chlorides [QAC] plus polyorganosiloxane) was highly effective in reducing the bioburden (colony-forming units/100 cm2, 1 vs 57; P < .001) compared with the standard curtain. The percentages of MDRO contamination were also significantly lower on antimicrobial curtain B than the standard curtain: methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, 0.5% vs 24% (P < .001); carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter spp, 0.2% vs 22.1% (P < .001); multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter spp, 0% vs 13.2% (P < .001). Notably, the median time to first contamination by MDROs was 27.6 times longer for antimicrobial curtain B than for the standard curtain (138 days vs 5 days; P = .001).

Antimicrobial curtain B (QAC plus polyorganosiloxane) but not antimicrobial curtain A (built-in silver) effectively reduced the microbial burden and MDRO contamination compared with the standard curtain, even after extended use in an active clinical setting. The antimicrobial curtain provided an opportunity to avert indirect costs related to curtain changing and laundering in addition to improving patient safety.

Culture-based studies, which focus on individual organisms, have implicated stethoscopes as potential vectors of nosocomial bacterial transmission. However, the full bacterial communities that contaminate in-use stethoscopes have not been investigated.

We used bacterial 16S rRNA gene deep-sequencing, analysis, and quantification to profile entire bacterial populations on stethoscopes in use in an intensive care unit (ICU), including practitioner stethoscopes, individual-use patient-room stethoscopes, and clean unused individual-use stethoscopes. Two additional sets of practitioner stethoscopes were sampled before and after cleaning using standardized or practitioner-preferred methods.

Bacterial contamination levels were highest on practitioner stethoscopes, followed by patient-room stethoscopes, whereas clean stethoscopes were indistinguishable from background controls. Bacterial communities on stethoscopes were complex, and community analysis by weighted UniFrac showed that physician and patient-room stethoscopes were indistinguishable and significantly different from clean stethoscopes and background controls. Genera relevant to healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) were common on practitioner stethoscopes, among which Staphylococcus was ubiquitous and had the highest relative abundance (6.8%–14% of contaminating bacterial sequences). Other HAI-related genera were also widespread although lower in abundance. Cleaning of practitioner stethoscopes resulted in a significant reduction in bacterial contamination levels, but these levels reached those of clean stethoscopes in only a few cases with either standardized or practitioner-preferred methods, and bacterial community composition did not significantly change.

Stethoscopes used in an ICU carry bacterial DNA reflecting complex microbial communities that include nosocomially important taxa. Commonly used cleaning practices reduce contamination but are only partially successful at modifying or eliminating these communities.

To systematically assess enhanced personal protective equipment (PPE) doffing safety risks.

We employed a 3-part approach to this study: (1) hierarchical task analysis (HTA) of the PPE doffing process; (2) human factors-informed failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA); and (3) focus group sessions with a convenience sample of infection prevention (IP) subject matter experts.

A large academic US hospital with a regional Special Pathogens Treatment Center and enhanced PPE doffing protocol experience.

Eight IP experts.

The HTA was conducted jointly by 2 human-factors experts based on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention PPE guidelines. The findings were used as a guide in 7 focus group sessions with IP experts to assess PPE doffing safety risks. For each HTA task step, IP experts identified failure mode(s), assigned priority risk scores, identified contributing factors and potential consequences, and identified potential risk mitigation strategies. Data were recorded in a tabular format during the sessions.

Of 103 identified failure modes, the highest priority scores were associated with team members moving between clean and contaminated areas, glove removal, apron removal, and self-inspection while preparing to doff. Contributing factors related to the individual (eg, technical/ teamwork competency), task (eg, undetected PPE contamination), tools/technology (eg, PPE design characteristics), environment (eg, inadequate space), and organizational aspects (eg, training) were identified. Participants identified 86 types of risk mitigation strategies targeting the failure modes.

Despite detailed guidelines, our study revealed 103 enhanced PPE doffing failure modes. Analysis of the failure modes suggests potential mitigation strategies to decrease self-contamination risk during enhanced PPE doffing.

To investigate the effects of friendly competition on hand hygiene compliance as part of a multimodal intervention program.

Prospective observational study in which the primary outcome was hand hygiene compliance. Differences were analyzed using the Pearson χ2 test. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence interval were calculated using multilevel logistic regression.

Observations were performed in 9 public hospitals and 1 rehabilitation center in Rotterdam, Netherlands.

From 2014 to 2016, at 5 time points (at 6-month intervals) in 120 hospital wards, 20,286 hand hygiene opportunities were observed among physicians, nurses, and other healthcare workers (HCWs).

The multimodal, friendly competition intervention consisted of mandatory interventions: monitoring and feedback of hand hygiene compliance and optional interventions (ie, e-learning, kick-off workshop, observer training, and team training). Hand hygiene opportunities, as formulated by the World Health Organization (WHO), were unobtrusively observed at 5 time points by trained observers. Compliance data were presented to the healthcare organizations as a ranking.

The overall mean hand hygiene compliance at time point 1 was 42.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 41.4–44.4), which increased to 51.4% (95% CI, 49.8–53.0) at time point 5 (P<.001). Nurses showed a significant improvement between time points 1 and 5 (P<.001), whereas the compliance of physicians and other HCWs remained unchanged. In the multilevel logistic regressions, time points, type of ward, and type of HCW showed a significant association with compliance.

Between the start and the end of the multimodal intervention program in a friendly competition setting, overall hand hygiene compliance increased significantly.

Hospitalized patients placed in isolation due to a carrier state or infection with resistant or highly communicable organisms report higher rates of anxiety and loneliness and have fewer physician encounters, room entries, and vital sign records. We hypothesized that isolation status might adversely impact patient experience as reported through Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) surveys, particularly regarding communication.

Retrospective analysis of HCAHPS survey results over 5 years.

A 1,165-bed, tertiary-care, academic medical center.

Patients on any type of isolation for at least 50% of their stay were the exposure group. Those never in isolation served as controls.

Multivariable logistic regression, adjusting for age, race, gender, payer, severity of illness, length of stay and clinical service were used to examine associations between isolation status and “top-box” experience scores. Dose response to increasing percentage of days in isolation was also analyzed.

Patients in isolation reported worse experience, primarily with staff responsiveness (help toileting 63% vs 51%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.77; P = .0009) and overall care (rate hospital 80% vs 73%; aOR, 0.78; P < .0001), but they reported similar experience in other domains. No dose-response effect was observed.

Isolated patients do not report adverse experience for most aspects of provider communication regarded to be among the most important elements for safety and quality of care. However, patients in isolation had worse experiences with staff responsiveness for time-sensitive needs. The absence of a dose-response effect suggests that isolation status may be a marker for other factors, such as illness severity. Regardless, hospitals should emphasize timely staff response for this population.