Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
OR Excellence Module 1: Reducing Surgical Site Infections Understanding the Risk Factors A Continuing Education Activity Sponsored By Grant Funds Provided By Welcome to OR EXCELLENCE Module 1: Reducing Surgical Site Infections Understanding the Risk Factors CONTINUING EDUCATION INSTRUCTIONS This educational activity is intended for use as a stand alone self-study activity. We suggest you take the following steps for successful completion: 1. Read the overview and objectives to ensure consistency with your own learning needs and objectives. 2. Review the content of the self-study activity, paying particular attention to those areas that reflect the objectives. 3. Complete the Test Questions and compare your responses with the answers provided. 4. For additional information on an issue or topic, consult the references. 5. To receive credit for this activity complete the evaluation and registration form. 6. Pfiedler Enterprises will send certificate once the participant has completed all seven modules. If you have any questions, please call: 720-748-6144. CONTACT INFORMATION: 2101 S. Blackhawk Street, Suite 220 Aurora, CO 80014-1475 Phone: 720-748-6144 Fax: 720-748-6196 Website: www.pfiedlerenterprises.com © Pfiedler Enterprises - all rights reserved 2011 OR EXCELLENCE Module 1: Reducing Surgical Site Infections - Understanding the Risk Factors OVERVIEW Surgical site infections (SSIs) are an important and grave concern in health care today, as they are a significant source of patient morbidity and mortality, extended hospital stays, and increased health care costs. Preventing the development of a surgical site infection is a desired outcome for all surgical patients. Since all members of the surgical team share the responsibility for achieving this outcome, they must understand the factors that increase a patient’s risk for SSIs, as well as evidence-based strategies to reduce the patient’s risk. This continuing education activity will provide an overview of the current impact and definition of SSIs, their causative agents, and associated risk analysis. Variables that increase a patient’s risk for SSI will be reviewed. Process variables related to reducing the risk for SSI will be described. Measures outlined in the Surgical Care Improvement Project (SCIP), specifically the CATS (clippers, antibiotics, temperature, sugar) tool, will be discussed. Other professional recommendations will also be outlined. LEARNER OBJECTIVES Upon completion of this continuing education activity, the participant should be able to: 1. List the patient variables related to increased risk for surgical site infection. 2. List the process variables related to reducing the risk of surgical site infection. 3. Describe the Surgical Care Improvement Project (SCIP) measures to prevent SSI. INTENDED AUDIENCE This continuing education activity is intended for use by perioperative nurses, and other health care professionals who are interested in learning more about the risk factors associated with surgical site infections and effective risk reduction strategies. CREDIT/CREDIT INFORMATION State Board Approval for Nurses Pfiedler Enterprises is a provider approved by the California Board of Registered Nursing, Provider Number CEP14944, for 1.0 contact hour(s). Obtaining full credit for this offering depends upon attendance, regardless of circumstances, from beginning to end. Licensees must provide their license numbers for record keeping purposes. The certificate of course completion issued at the conclusion of this course must be retained in the participant’s records for at least four (4) years as proof of attendance. AST Credit for Surgical Technologists This continuing education activity is approved by the Association of Surgical Technologists, Inc. for (1.0) CE credits for continuing education in Surgical Technology. RELEASE AND EXPIRATION DATE This continuing education activity was planned and provided in accordance with accreditation criteria. This material was originally produced in August 2011 and can no longer be used after August 2013 without being updated; therefore, this continuing education activity expires in August 2013. 1 DISCLAIMER Accredited status as a provider refers only to continuing nursing education activities and does not imply endorsement of any products. SUPPORT Grant funds for the development of this activity were provided by 3M Healthcare. PLANNING COMMITTEE Judith Pfister, RN, BSN, MBA Program Manager Pfiedler Enterprises Aurora, Colorado Rose Moss, RN, MN, CNOR Nurse Consultant Moss Enterprises Larkspur, Colorado Chad Edmonson, CST Certified Surgical Technologist Skyridge Medical Center Lone Tree, Colorado EXPERT REVIEWERS Elizabeth Deroian, RN, BA Program Manager Pfiedler Enterprises Aurora, Colorado Julia A. Kneedler, RN, EdD Director of Education Pfiedler Enterprises Aurora, Colorado Kristine L. Winters, RN, BSN Consultant Aurora, Colorado 2 DISCLOSURE All planning committee members and expert reviewers participating in all continuing education activities sponsored by Pfiedler Enterprises are expected to disclose any real or apparent financial affiliations related to the content of this activity. Detailed disclosure appears below. 1. Have you (or your spouse/partner) had any personal financial relationship in the last 12 months with the manufacturer of the products or services that will be presented in this continuing education activity (planner/reviewer) or in your presentation (speaker/author)? 2. Type of affiliation/financial interest with name of corporate organization. 3. Will your presentation include discussion of any off-label or investigational drug or medical device? Judith I. Pfister, RN, BSN, MBA 1.Yes 2. Co-owner of company that receives grant funds from 3M Healthcare. 3. No Rose Moss, RN, MN, CNOR 1. No 2. None 3. No Elizabeth Deroian, RN, BA 1.Yes 2. None 3. No Julia A. Kneedler, RN, MS, EdD 1.Yes 2. Co-owner of company that receives grant funds from 3M Healthcare. 3. No Chad Edmonson, CST 1. No 2. None 3. No Kristine L. Winters, RN, BSN 1. No 2. None 3. No 3 PRIVACY AND CONFIDENTIALITY POLICY Pfiedler Enterprises is committed to protecting your privacy and following industry best practices and regulations regarding continuing education. The information we collect is never shared with other organizations for commercial purposes. Our privacy and confidentiality policy covers the site www.pfiedlerenterprises.com and is effective on March 27, 2008. To directly access more information on our Privacy and Confidentiality Policy, type the following URL address into your browser: http://www.pfiedlerenterprises.com/privacy-policy. In addition to this privacy statement, this website is compliant with the guidelines for internet-based continuing education programs. The privacy policy of this website is strictly enforced. CONTACT INFORMATION If site users have any questions or suggestions regarding our privacy policy, please contact us at: Phone: 720-748-6144 Email: [email protected] Postal Address: 2101 S. Blackhawk Street, Suite 220 Aurora, Colorado 80014 Website URL: http://www.pfiedlerenterprises.com 4 INTRODUCTION One of the expected outcomes for every surgical patient is that he/she is free from signs and symptoms of infection.1 Today, unfortunately, surgical site infections (SSIs) are common complications and represent one of the leading causes of postoperative morbidity and mortality; they may also be associated with enormous additional costs for hospitals and health care systems.2 Therefore, all members of the surgical team should understand the factors that increase a patient’s risk for a surgical site infection and the evidence-based strategies to reduce the risk. SSIs: TODAY’S REALITY In order to appreciate the importance of implementing effective measures to reduce a patient’s risk for the development of a surgical site infection, the impact of SSIs on the both the patient and the healthcare system must be reviewed. In the United States, SSIs occur in 2% to 5% of patients undergoing inpatient surgery; approximately 500,000 SSIs occur each year.3 In addition, each surgical site infection is associated with approximately 7 to 10 additional postoperative hospital days. Patients with an SSI have a 2 to 11 times higher risk of death, compared to surgical patients without an SSI; 77% of deaths among patients with a surgical site infection are directly attributable to the SSI. While the attributable costs of an SSI vary, depending on the type of operative procedure and the type of infecting pathogen, published estimates range from $3,000 to $29,000; furthermore, SSIs are believed to account for up to $10 billion annually in healthcare expenditures. These estimates are based on inpatient costs and do not account for the additional costs of rehospitalization, postdischarge outpatient expenses, and long term disabilities. In July of 2008, the increased costs associated with SSIs were also addressed by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) when it announced new Medicare and Medicaid payment and coverage policies to improve safety for hospitalized patients.4 The Inpatient Prospective Payment System (IPPS) 2009 final rule expanded the list of certain hospital-acquired conditions that have Medicare payment implications, as of October 1, 2008. At that time, the agency also issued a letter to State Medicaid Directors outlining the authority of State Medicaid Agencies to deny payment for selected hospital-acquired conditions. As a result, CMS no longer reimburses hospitals for the increased care that a patient needs after an extreme medical error has occurred or for a condition that was not present on admission, but is subsequently acquired during the course of the patient’s hospitalization. In addition, the patient is not responsible for the additional costs and therefore cannot be billed. Initially, hospitals were not reimbursed for infections associated with vascular catheters and coronary artery bypass graft surgery. As of October 1, 2008, hospitals were no longer reimbursed for surgical site infections after selected elective procedures, including certain orthopedic surgeries and bariatric surgery for obesity (see Table 1). Table 1 – Hospital-Acquired Conditions: Surgical Site Infections (for which CMS no longer pays higher reimbursement)5 Mediastinitis after coronary artery bypass graft Associated with certain orthopedic procedures involving the spine, neck, shoulder, elbow Associated with certain bariatric surgical procedures for obesity, specifically laparoscopic gastric bypass, gastroenterostomy, laparoscopic gastric restrictive surgery The 2011 update to the CMS hospital IPPS rule included new reporting provisions for SSIs through the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN).6 CMS has published a final rule that will require reporting SSIs through the CDC’s National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN); this reporting will be a part of the CMS Hospital Inpatient Quality Reporting Program. Reporting for SSIs will be clarified in a future regulation; however, data collection is to begin with January 2, 2012 discharges for FY 2014 Medicare payment determination. As a result, Medicare payments to hospitals will be tied to how well the facility protects patients from SSIs. This means that patients will be able to determine how health care facilities are doing in regards to preventing SSIs; furthermore, hospitals and other health care facilities will be incentivized to implement effective prevention strategies. 5 COMMON PATHOGENS THAT CAUSE SSIs The source of microbial contamination of the surgical site may be either the endogenous microorganisms (i.e., the bacteria from the patient’s own skin, mucous membranes, or hollow viscera) or exogenous microorganisms (i.e., the microorganisms from health-care personnel, the environment, surgical instruments and other materials).7 When introduced into body tissues by surgery or through medical devices and surgical instruments, the pathogenic potential of endogenous microorganisms increases. However, for most SSIs, the source of pathogens is the patient’s endogenous flora.8 The pathogens most often associated with SSIs are Staphylococcus aureus, coagulase-negative staphylococcus, and enterococcus; Table 1 below lists the distribution of the top ranking pathogens that cause SSIs. Alarmingly, more and more SSIs are due to antibiotic-resistant microorganisms, such as methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA).9 In fact, in the study below, 49% of the S. aureus infections were MRSA.10 Table 1 - Distribution of Top Ranking Pathogens Causing SSIs (January 2006 - October 2007)10 Pathogen 6 SSI Staphylococcus aureus 30.01% Coagulase Negative Staph (CNS) 13.74% Enterococcus spp. 11.21% Pseudomonas aeruginosa 5.55% Eschericia coli 9.55% Acinetobacter baumannii 0.60% Enterobacter spp. 4.17% Candida spp. 2.07% DEFINITION AND CLASSIFICATION OF SSIs For purposes of standardized reporting, SSIs have been defined and classified as superficial incisional SSIs, deep incisional SSIs, and organ/space SSIs (see Table2 for the complete definitions and Figure 1 for a graphic illustration). 11 Table 2 - Definition of SSIs Superficial Incisional SSI • Infection occurs within 30 days of the operation. • Infection involves only skin or subcutaneous tissue. • At least 1 of the following: − Purulent drainage, − Positive culture from the incision, − At least 1 symptom of infection (pain or tenderness, localized swelling, redness, heat) and incision is opened by surgeon, unless incision is culture-negative, or − Diagnosis of SSI by surgeon or attending physician. Deep Incisional SSI • Infection within 30 days of the operation if no implant is left in place or within 1 year if implant is in place and the infection appears to be related to the operation. • Infection involves deep soft tissues. • At least 1 of the following: − Purulent drainage from the deep incision but not from organs/spaces associated with the surgical site, − Spontaneous dehiscence of deep incision or deliberate opening by a surgeon when the patient has at least 1 symptom of infection (fever, localized pain, or tenderness), unless site is culturenegative, − Abscess or other evidence of infection involving the deep incision found on direct examination, during reoperation, or by histopathology or radiography, or − Diagnosis of SSI by surgeon or attending physician. Organ/Space SSI • Infection within 30 days of the operation if no implant is left in place or within 1 year if implant is in place and the infection appears to be related to the operation. • Infection involves any part of the anatomy (e.g., organs or spaces), other than the incision, which was opened or manipulated during an operation. • At least 1 of the following: − Purulent drainage from drain placed into the organ/space, − Positive culture of fluid or tissue from the organ/space, − Abscess or other evidence of infection involving the deep incision found on direct examination, during reoperation, or by histopathology or radiography, or − Diagnosis of SSI by surgeon or attending physician. 7 Figure 1 – Surgical Site Infections SSI RISK ANALYSIS The development of a surgical site infection is a complex biologic process, occurring within a framework of multiple variables; this makes the identification of individual causes problematic. Further complicating the issue is that comparatively little research pertaining to prevention is available; therefore, the variability of each process must be considered in the development of preventive strategies. Microbial contamination of the surgical site is a necessary precursor of an SSI; the risk of an SSI can be conceptualized according to the following formula: 12 Process Variability ↓ Dose of Bacterial Contamination x Virulence (Resistance) ____________________________________________________ Resistance of the Host (Patient) ↑ Patient Variability 8 = SSI Risk WOUND CLASSIFICATION Another important factor in determining a patient’s risk for developing a surgical site infection is the classification of the surgical wound. The CDC recommends four surgical wound classifications: clean, clean contaminated, contaminated, and dirty or infected wounds (see Table 3).13 Table 3 – Surgical Wound Classification Wound Class Class I / Clean Description An uninfected operative wound in which no inflammation is encountered and the respiratory, alimentary, genital, or uninfected urinary tract is not entered. In addition, clean wounds are primarily closed and, if necessary, drained with closed drainage. Operative incisional wounds that follow nonpenetrating (blunt) trauma should be included in this category if they meet the criteria. Class II / Clean-Contaminated An operative wound in which the respiratory, alimentary, genital, or urinary tracts are entered under controlled conditions and without unusual contamination. Specifically, operations involving the biliary tract, appendix, vagina, and oropharynx are included in this category, provided no evidence of infection or major break in technique is encountered. Class III / Contaminated Open, fresh, accidental wounds. In addition, operations with major breaks in sterile technique (e.g., open cardiac massage) or gross spillage from the gastrointestinal tract, and incisions in which acute, nonpurulent inflammation is encountered are included in this category. Class IV / Dirty-Infected Old traumatic wounds with retained devitalized tissue and those that involve existing clinical infection or perforated viscera. This definition suggests that the organisms causing postoperative infection were present in the operative field before the operation. This classification system reflects the probability of SSI and thus enables the perioperative team to take appropriate preventive measures. 14 In addition, the Association of periOperative Registered Nurses’ (AORN) Recommended Practices for Documentation of Perioperative Nursing Care include that wound classification is documented in the patient’s record.15 Patient Variables16 In looking at the risk analysis formula, patient variability, i.e. resistance of the host, plays a role in the development of an SSI. Factors that increase a patient’s risk for developing a surgical site infection include: ●● Age; ●● Compromised immune system; ●● Diabetes; ●● A remote site infection that is not treated prior to surgery; ●● Nicotine use; 9 ●● Nutritional status; ●● Prolonged preoperative stay; ●● Obesity; ●● Steroid use; ●● Duration of surgery; and ●● Nasal carriage of S. aureus. These factors are useful in two ways; first, they allow stratification of surgical procedures, making surveillance data more comprehensible and secondly, knowledge of certain risk factors prior to certain operations may allow for targeted prevention measures. For example, for a patient who is known to have a remote site infection, the surgical team may delay the procedure until after the infection has resolved, in order to decrease the patient’s risk for a surgical site infection. PROCESS VARIABILITY There is also variability in several processes that can play a part in the development of an SSI. In this module we will give an overview of the many process variables, which will be covered more in depth in subsequent modules. SCIP Measures – CATS The Surgical Care Improvement Project (SCIP) is a national quality partnership of organizations focused on improving surgical care by significantly reducing surgical complications.17 It has identified four key measures designed to reduce surgical site infections based on the acronym, CATS:18 ●● Clippers o Hair removal–if hair must be removed from the surgical site, clippers are the best option. Never use a razor. The AORN Recommended Practices for Preoperative Patient Skin Antisepsis state that hair at the surgical site should be left in place, i.e., not removed, whenever possible, as studies have demonstrated that preoperative shaving of the surgical site increases the risk of SSI. Removing hair at the surgical site abrades the skin surface and enhances microbial growth. Depilatory creams may cause skin reactions in some patients; these creams may, however, be used for hair removal if skin testing is performed without tissue irritation. Other recommended changes for improvement include: ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● 10 Remove all razors from the operating room (OR) and supply areas; Perform hair removal when necessary with clippers right before surgery; Establish a protocol for when and how to remove hair in affected areas; Provide patient education and materials on appropriate hair removal techniques so that he/she does not shave the surgical area at home; Avoid shaving heart surgery patients for electrocardiogram (EKG) conducted shortly before surgery; and Hair removal should take place outside the OR suite. Antibiotics o Prophylactic antibiotics – antibiotics consistent with national guidelines should be administered within one hour of incision time and discontinued within 24 hours, in most cases. It is estimated that 40–60% of all SSIs are preventable with the appropriate use of prophylactic antibiotics; furthermore, overuse, under use, improper timing, and misuse of antibiotics occurs in 25– 50% of operations. A large number of hospitalized patients develop infections caused by Clostridium difficile;16% of this type of infection in surgical patients can be attributed to inappropriate antibiotic prophylaxis alone. Inappropriate use of broad spectrum antibiotics or prolonged courses of prophylactic antibiotics puts all patients at even greater health risks due to the development of antibiotic-resistant pathogens. Changes for improvement in prophylactic antibiotic administration include: ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● Designate responsibility and accountability for preoperative prophylactic antibiotic administration (e.g., preoperative nurse, circulating nurse, anesthesiologist) connected to a key point in process; Standardize the administration process to occur with commonly performed activities within one hour prior to incision; Through the use of antibiotic standing orders specific to surgical site, administer prophylactic antibiotics according to guidelines based on local consensus; Make the agreed-upon antibiotics available in the OR; Standardize the medication delivery process to ensure timely delivery of preoperative antibiotics to the holding area; Provide visible reminders or checklists to give antibiotics for each patient (e.g., a brightly colored sticker); Ensure systematic documentation of antibiotic administration on every patient chart, whether paper or electronic; Develop system in which the antibiotic is hanging at the head of patient’s bed, ready for administration; Design protocols to deliver the antibiotic to OR with patient; Educate all involved members of the OR staff regarding the importance of and rationale for antibiotic timing, selection, and duration; Provide feedback monthly on prophylaxis compliance and infection data; Involve the pharmacy staff to ensure timing, selection, and duration are maintained; Institute a computerized physician order entry system with procedure-specific fields for antibiotic timing, selection, and duration; Improve screening for allergies to beta lactam antibiotics to eliminate false positives; Consider weight-based antibiotic dosing (i.e., higher dose for larger patients). While this may be cumbersome, the facility may want to increase cephalosporins from 1 to 2 grams for all patients, since there are minor issues regarding toxicity; and Re-dose antibiotics for longer procedures (e.g., after 3 hours for short half-life cephalosporin). Temperature o Normothermia–SCIP Infection 10 specifies that active warming should be used intraoperatively–OR–the patient should have at least one temperature of ≥36.0°C within 30 minutes immediately before or 15 minutes immediately after anesthesia end time. The measure applies to all patients undergoing surgical procedures under general or neuraxial anesthesia of 60 minutes or longer. Unplanned perioperative hypothermia is one of the most common complications of surgery; even mild hypothermia increases the incidence of several serious adverse consequences, including SSIs, adverse cardiac events, increased blood loss, alteration in medication metabolism, and prolonged lengths of stay in the post anesthesia care unit (PACU) as well as the hospital. 11 There are many factors inherent in the OR environment that can cause patients to become clinically hypothermic during surgery; these include anesthesia, anxiety, wet skin preparations, and skin exposure in cold ORs. There is evidence to show that preventing hypothermia is beneficial in reducing the associated complications noted above, and it is clearly more comfortable for patients. Changes for improvement in temperature management include: ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● Use warmed forced-air blankets preoperatively, during surgery, and in the PACU; Use warmed intravenous (IV) fluids; Use warming blankets under patients on the OR bed; Use hats and booties on patients perioperatively; Adjust engineering controls so that ORs and other patient care areas are not permitted to become excessively cold overnight, when many rooms are closed; and Designate responsibility and accountability for thermoregulation. Sugar o Glucose control – cardiac surgery patients should have controlled 6 a.m. serum glucose (≤ 200mg/dL) on postoperative Day 1 and Day 2. A review of the medical literature demonstrates that the degree of hyperglycemia in the postoperative period correlated with the rate of surgical site infection in patients undergoing major cardiac surgery. Changes for improvement in glucose control include: ●● ●● ●● ●● Implement a glucose control protocol (e.g., a sliding scale or insulin drip); Develop one protocol to be used for all surgical patients; Regularly check preoperative blood glucose levels on all patients to identify hyperglycemia; this is should be done early enough so that the risk assessment can be completed and treatment initiated if indicated; and Assign responsibility and accountability for blood glucose monitoring and control. Hand Hygiene and Surgical Hand Antisepsis Hand hygiene is another process variable in reducing the risk for SSIs. Skin is a major source of microbial contamination in the surgical environment.25 Furthermore, microorganism transfer from the hands of health-care workers to patients is an important factor in health care-associated infection (HAI); hand hygiene is recognized as a primary method of decreasing HAIs.26 Hand hygiene, hand washing, and surgical hand scrubs are the most effective methods for preventing and controlling infections; they represent the least expensive means of achieving both. The normal skin flora on the hands include both transient and resident microorganisms; transient flora are microorganisms that colonize the superficial layers of the skin and are the microorganisms acquired by healthcare workers when caring for patients and coming into contact with contaminated surfaces.27 Transient microorganisms are easier to remove during hand washing. Resident flora are bacteria that are seated in the deeper skin layers and are more difficult to remove. Both transient and resident bacteria usually maintain a constant level on individuals’ hands. Therefore, the purposes of surgical hand hygiene and antisepsis are:28 12 ●● To remove dirt, skin oil, and transient microorganisms from the nails, hands, and forearms; ●● To reduce the resident microbial count to as near zero as possible; and ●● To leave an antimicrobial residue on the skin to prevent regrowth of microbes for several hours. AORN Recommended Practices state: A surgical hand scrub should be performed by health care personnel before donning sterile gloves for surgical or other invasive procedures. Use of either an antimicrobial surgical scrub agent intended for surgical hand antisepsis or an alcohol-based antiseptic surgical hand rub with documented persistent and cumulative activity that has met US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulatory requirements for surgical hand antisepsis is acceptable. In addition, the use of a brush for surgical hand scrubs is not necessary for adequate reduction of bacterial counts. Scrubbing with a brush is associated with an increase in skin cell shedding. The skin on hands can become damaged with the use of brushes resulting in an increase in bacterial load.29 Reducing Bacteria on the Body – Patient Preparation To minimize both the clinical and fiscal costs of SSIs, a focus on effective prevention strategies is critical. Prevention takes on even greater significance when the emergence and spread of antibiotic-resistant causative microorganisms is taken into consideration. As noted, inappropriate prophylactic antibiotics increases the development of antibiotic-resistant pathogens. Resistant infections are more likely to require treatment with a second- or third-choice antibiotic; these drugs tend to be less effective, more toxic, and more expensive than the first-line drug. 30 Therefore, a key process variable is reducing the bacteria on the patient’s body. The role of the patient’s endogenous flora in the development of a surgical site infection as discussed above means that a major aspect of SSI prevention is proper preparation of the patient’s skin before surgery and in the operating or procedure room in order to minimize microbial colonization near the incision site. To prevent bacteria on the skin from entering the surgical wound, the skin at and around the proposed incision site must be cleaned and disinfected.31 Two patient skin preparation measures are preoperative showering or bathing and preoperative skin antisepsis. PREOPERATIVE BATHING The CDC recommends that patients be required to shower or bathe with an antiseptic agent at least the night before the day of the operation.32 The AORN Recommended Practices for Preoperative Patient Skin Antisepsis outline that patients undergoing open Class I surgical procedures below the chin should have two preoperative showers with chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) before surgery, when appropriate.33 The act of washing and rinsing removes microorganisms from the skin; some organisms may be difficult or impossible to kill with the application of CHG alone. However, unless contraindicated, patients should be instructed or assisted to perform two preoperative baths or showers with CHG before surgery in order to reduce the number of microorganisms on the skin and reduce the risk of subsequent contamination of the surgical wound. Four percent CHG is more effective than povidone-iodine or soap, and more than one shower is needed to achieve the greatest antiseptic effectiveness. A sequential process of two applications of CHG with a minimum of two minutes contact time for intraoperative skin preps is suggested by the manufacturer’s recommendations. PREOPERATIVE PATIENT SKIN ANTISEPSIS The recommendations for antimicrobial agent selection for preoperative patient skin antisepsis outlined by the CDC and AORN state that an “appropriate antiseptic” be used for skin preparation; neither states that one antiseptic agent is preferred over another. The CDC recommendations state that an appropriate antiseptic agent for skin preparation should be used.34 Preoperatively, the antiseptic skin preparation should be applied in concentric circles moving toward the periphery. The prepared area must be large enough to extend the incision or create new incisions or drain sites, if necessary. An antiseptic agent that has immediate and persistent activity that meets the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulatory requirements for a patient preoperative skin prep and is approved by the health care organization’s infection control personnel should be used for all preoperative skin preparation. The AORN recommended practices state that preoperative skin antiseptic should:36 ●● significantly reduce microorganisms on intact skin; ●● contain a nonirritating antimicrobial preparation; 13 ●● be broad spectrum; ●● be fast acting; and ●● have a persistent effect. Based on these recommendations, it is important to note that currently, no one prepping agent has been found to be superior; when possible, an alcohol-based skin prep with a second active ingredient – either CHG or povidone iodine – should be used. In its 2010 Safe Practices for Healthcare, the National Quality Forum (NQF) includes prevention of SSI in Safe Practice #22.35 The practice of prepping the skin prior to surgery is included in these recommendations and states: “Preoperatively use solutions that contain isopropyl alcohol as skin antiseptic preparation until other alternatives have been proven as safe and effective, and allow appropriate drying time per product guidelines.” This statement is in line with CDC, SHEA, IDSA and AORN guidelines and recommended practices to use an appropriate skin prep agent. NASAL DECONTAMINATION Nasal decontamination is another measure in reducing bacteria on the patient. Humans carry a significant amount of bacteria in our noses. Of particular interest is S. aureus. Approximately 30 percent of the population carries S. aureus in their nose, and of those who carry S. aureus, 1 percent carries MRSA.36 In addition, nasal carriage of S. aureus has been identified as a major risk factor for wound infections after both orthopedic total joint and cardiac surgery.37, 38 Mupirocin ointment is effective as a topical agent for eradicating S. aureus from the nares of colonized patients or healthcare workers and is indicated for use during institutional outbreaks. An early study suggested that the risk of SSI was reduced in patients undergoing cardiothoracic operations when mupirocin was applied preoperatively to their nares, regardless of their carrier status.39 In this study, the SSI rates for 752 mupirocin-treated patients were compared with those previously observed for an untreated group of 928 historical control patients; the significant SSI rate reduction was attributed to the mupirocin treatment. A more recent report concluded for patients who are nasal carriers of S. aureus, the use of mupirocin ointment results in a statistically significant reduction in S. aureus infections.40 One of the growing concerns with the use of mupirocin ointment, because it is an antibiotic, is development of resistance. Surveillance studies have reported mupirocin resistant MRSA strains in up to 13 percent of patients in institutions that do not practice routine use of mupirocin and in up to 65 percent of patients in areas with widespread mupirocin use.41 ASEPTIC TECHNIQUE The creation and maintenance of a sterile field can directly influence patient outcomes.42 Further, rigorous adherence to aseptic practices by all members of the surgical team assists in fulfilling the professional responsibility to protect the patient from injury; it is also the foundation of surgical site infection prevention. For example, others who work in close proximity to the sterile surgical field, such as anesthesia providers who are separated from the sterile field only by a drape barrier, also must abide by these principles.43 TRAFFIC PATTERNS Establishing and maintaining traffic patterns also assist in reducing the patient’s risk for developing a surgical site infection. The air in the operating room may contain microbial-laden dust, lint, skin squames, or respiratory droplets; the microbial level in the air is directly proportional to the number of people moving about in the room.44 Clearly define and enforced traffic control practices protect the patient, as well as personnel, supplies, and equipment from cross contamination.45 Therefore, efforts should be made to minimize personnel traffic in an OR during surgical procedures. 14 SURGICAL ATTIRE AND DRAPES The human body and inanimate surfaces inherent to the perioperative practice setting are major sources of microbial contamination and transmission of microbes.46 An individual sheds millions of skin squames daily; 5% to 10% of skin squames carry bacteria.47 As previously noted, patients are at risk of contamination from both endogenous and exogenous sources during an operative or invasive procedure; therefore, the use of surgical attire and drapes assists in promoting a high level of cleanliness and hygiene within the perioperative environment. STERILITY ASSURANCE A key measure in minimizing the risk of SSIs is to provide surgical items that are free from contamination at the time of use, as inadequate sterilization of surgical instruments has resulted in SSI outbreaks.48 The sterilization process starts with proper cleaning and decontamination of surgical items followed by a sterilization process. Sterilization processes should always be monitored to detect potential failure modes with the goal of improving patient outcomes. A variety of monitoring tools are used to help ensure sterility, such as physical monitors, chemical indicators and biological indicators. These monitoring tools are used to help ensure that instruments and supplies being used on patients are free from viable microorganisms. Biological indicators are used to assess cycle lethality as they have the ability to detect conditions that are not sufficient to kill spores.49 SURGICAL TECHNIQUE Excellent surgical technique is also believed to reduce the risk of SSI. Surgical techniques include achieving and maintaining effective hemostasis while preserving adequate blood supply; gentle handling of tissues; avoiding inadvertent entries into a hollow viscus; removing devitalized (e.g., necrotic or charred) tissues; using drains and suture material appropriately; eradicating dead space; and appropriate management of the incision postoperatively. Any foreign body, including suture material, a prosthesis, or drain, may lead to inflammation at the surgical site; this in turn, may increase the probability of SSI after otherwise benign levels of tissue contamination.50 CONCLUSION Infection prevention is one of the surgical team’s greatest responsibilities; one of the expected outcomes for every surgical patient is that he/she is free from the signs and symptoms of infection. The development of an SSI results in unnecessary discomfort, increased lengths of stay, and additional health care costs. Today, there are increased economic pressures on health care facilities and personnel to develop and implement effective infection prevention strategies. There are several patient and process variables that increase a patient’s risk for the development of a surgical site infection. As patient advocates, all members of the perioperative team must understand these risk factors and implement appropriate measures to prevent SSIs, as outlined by the SCIP, CDC, and AORN. Through this knowledge and intervention, all members of the surgical team will play an integral role in proactively minimizing the risk for surgical site infections, and ultimately improve patient outcomes. 15 GLOSSARY Antiseptic Technique Method by which contamination with microorganisms is prevented. Clean Wounds (Class I) Uninfected operative wounds in which no inflammation is encountered and the respiratory, alimentary, genital, or uninfected urinary tract is not entered. Clean/Contaminated Wounds (Class II) Operative wounds in which the respiratory, alimentary, genital, or urinary tracts are entered under controlled conditions and without unusual contamination. Contaminated Wound (Class III) Open, fresh, accidental wounds; operations with major breaks in sterile technique (e.g., open cardiac massage) or gross spillage from the gastrointestinal tract, and incisions in which acute, nonpurulent inflammation is encountered. Deep Incisional SSI An infection involving deep soft tissue, fascia, and muscle. Dirty/Infected Wounds (Class IV) Old traumatic wounds with retained devitalized tissue and those that involve existing clinical infection or perforated viscera; this definition suggests that the organisms causing postoperative infection were present in the operative field before the operation. Endogenous Growing from or on the inside; caused by factors within the body or arising from internal structural or functional causes. Exogenous Growing from or on the outside; caused by factors (as food or a traumatic factor) or an agent (as a disease-producing organism) from outside the organism or system; introduced from or produced outside the body. Healthcare-Associated Infection (HAI) An infection acquired by patients during hospitalization, with confirmation of diagnosis by clinical or laboratory evidence. The infective agents may originate from endogenous or exogenous sources. HAIs, which are also known as nosocomial infections, may not become apparent until the patient has been discharged from the hospital. The invasion and multiplication of microorganisms in body tissues that cause cellular injury and clinical symptoms. Infection Microorganism An organism that is too small to be seen with the naked eye and requires a microscope. Bacteria, viruses, fungi, and protozoa are generally called microorganisms. Normothermia Core body temperature between 36 – 38°C (96.8° – 100.4°F). Organ or Space SSI An infection that involves any part of the anatomy (e.g., organs or spaces), other than the incision, which was opened or manipulated during an operation. Pathogen A microorganism that causes disease. 16 Resident Flora Microorganisms persistently isolated from most people’s skin. These microorganisms are considered to be permanent residents of the skin and are not readily removed by mechanical friction. Squame Superficial SSI A scale or flake, as of skin. Surgical Attire An infection involving the skin and subcutaneous tissue as opposed to deep tissue. Nonsterile apparel designated for the OR practice setting that includes two-piece pantsuits, cover jackets, head coverings, shoes, masks, protective eyewear, and other protective barriers. Surgical Site Infection (SSI) An infection at the site of a surgical incision; the infection may be superficial, deep, or it may extend to organs. Surgical Site Infection Risk Measure of the likelihood that a patient will suffer an SSI. Transient Flora Microorganisms isolated from the skin, but not demonstrated to be consistently present in the majority of people. They are considered transient because they can be readily transmitted on hands unless removed by mechanical friction and soap and water washing. 17 REFERENCES 1. Petersen C. Perioperative Nursing Data Set: The Perioperative Nursing Vocabulary, 3rd ed. Denver, CO: AORN, Inc.; 2011: 254. 2. Graf K, Ott E, Vonberg RP, Kuehn C, Schilling T, Haverich A, Chaberny IF. Surgical site infections-economic consequences for the health care system. Langenbeck’s Archives of Surgery. 2011 Mar 15. [Epub ahead of print]. 3. Anderson DJ, Kaye KS, Classen D, Arias KM, Podgorny K, Burstin H, Calfee DP, Coffin SE, Dubberke ER, Fraser V, Gerding DN, Griffin FA, Gross P, Klompas M, Lo E, Marschall J, Mermel LA, Nicolle L, Pegues DA, Perl TM, Saint S, Salgado CD, Weinstein RA, Wise R, Yokoe DS. Strategies to prevent surgical site infection in acute care hospitals. Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology. 2008; Suppl 1:S51-61. 4. CMS. Medicare and Medicaid move aggressively to encourage greater patient safety in hospitals and reduce never events. http://www.cms.hhs.gov/apps/media/press/release.asp?Counter=3219&intNumPerPage=10&checkDate=&ch eckKey=&srchType=1&numDays=3500&srchOpt=0&srchData=&keywordType=All&chkNewsType=1%2C+2%2C+3% 2C+4%2C+5&intPage=&showAll=&pYear=&year=&desc=false&cboOrder=date. Accessed March 16, 2011. 5. Memorandum report: adverse events in hospitals: public disclosure of information about events, OEI-06-09- 00360. Available at: http://oig.hhs.gov/oei/reports/oei-06-09-00360.pdf. Accessed March 16, 2011. 6. APIC. CMS HAI reporting requirements. Available at: http://www.apic.org/Content/NavigationMenu/ GovernmentAdvocacy/PublicPolicyLibrary/FAQ_HAI_HAC_reporting_11_IPPS_10410.pdf. Accessed March 16, 2011. 7. Barnard BM. Fighting surgical site infections. Infection Control Today [serial online]. Available at: http://www. infectioncontroltoday.com/articles/2002/04/fighting-surgical-site-infections.aspx. Accessed March 17, 2011. 8. Mangram AJ, Horan TC, Pearson ML, Silver LC, Jarvis WR. Guideline for prevention of surgical site infection, 1999. Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology. 1999;20(4):247-278. Also available at: http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dhqp/ pdf/guidelines/SSI.pdf. Accessed March 17, 2011. 9. Mangram AJ, Horan TC, Pearson ML, Silver LC, Jarvis WR. Guideline for prevention of surgical site infection, 1999. Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology. 1999;20(4):247-278. Also available at: http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dhqp/ pdf/guidelines/SSI.pdf. Accessed March 17, 2011. 10. Hidron AI, Edwards JR, Patel J, Horan TC, Sievert DM, Pollock DA, Fridkin SK; National Healthcare Safety Network Team; Participating National Healthcare Safety Network Facilities. NHSN annual update: antimicrobial-resistant pathogens associated with healthcare-associated infections: annual summary of data reported to the National Healthcare Safety Network at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2006-2007. Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology. 2008;29(11):996-1011. 11. Horan TC, Gaynes RP, Martone WJ, Jarvis WR, Emori TG. CDC definitions of nosocomial surgical site infections, 1992: a modification of CDC definitions of surgical wound infections. Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology. 1992;13(10):606-608. 12. Mangram AJ, Horan TC, Pearson ML, Silver LC, Jarvis WR. Guideline for prevention of surgical site infection, 1999. Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology. 1999;20(4):247-278. Also available at: http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dhqp/ pdf/guidelines/SSI.pdf. Accessed March 16, 2011. 13. Mangram AJ, Horan TC, Pearson ML, Silver LC, Jarvis WR. Guideline for prevention of surgical site infection, 1999. Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology. 1999;20(4):247-278. Also available at: http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dhqp/ pdf/guidelines/SSI.pdf. Accessed March 16, 2011. 14. McEwen DR. Wound healing, dressings, and drains. Alexander’s Care of the Patient in Surgery, 14th ed.; JC Rothrock, Ed. St. Louis, MO: Mosby; 2011: 254. 15. AORN. Recommended practices for documentation of perioperative nursing care. Perioperative Standards and Recommended Practices. Denver, CO: AORN, Inc.; 2011: 303-305. 18 16. Mangram AJ, Horan TC, Pearson ML, Silver LC, Jarvis WR. Guideline for prevention of surgical site infection, 1999. Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology. 1999;20(4):247-278. Also available at: http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dhqp/ pdf/guidelines/SSI.pdf. Accessed March 16, 2011. 17. QualityNet. SCIP. Available at: http://www.qualitynet.org/dcs/ContentServer?c=MQParents&pagename=Medqic%2FCo ntent%2FParentShellTemplate&cid=1228694349383&parentName=Category. Accessed March 17, 2011. 18. QualityNet. Tools: CATS decrease surgical site infections. Available at: http://www.qualitynet.org/dcs/ContentServer?c= MQTools&pagename=Medqic%2FMQTools%2FToolTemplate&cid=1228733278303. Accessed March 17, 2011. 19. AORN. Recommended practices for preoperative patient skin antisepsis. Perioperative Standards and Recommended Practices. Denver, CO: AORN, Inc.; 2011: 361-379. 20. IHI. Avoid shaving operative site. Available at: http://www.ihi.org/IHI/Topics/PatientSafety/SurgicalSiteInfections/ Changes/SSI+Avoid+Shaving+the+Operative+Site.htm. Accessed March 17, 2011. 21. IHI. Use prophylactic antibiotics appropriately. Available at: http://www.ihi.org/IHI/Topics/PatientSafety/ SurgicalSiteInfections/Changes/SSI+Use+Prophylactic+Antibiotics+Appropriately.htm. Accessed March 17, 2011. 22. AORN. Recommended practices for the prevention of unplanned perioperative hypothermia. Perioperative Standards and Recommended Practices. Denver, CO: AORN, Inc.; 2011: 307-320. 23. AHRQ Perioperative Temperature Management http://www.qualitymeasures.ahrq.gov/content.aspx?id=16276 24. IHI. Maintain postoperative glucose control for major cardiac surgery patients. Available at: http://www.ihi.org/IHI/Topics/ PatientSafety/SurgicalSiteInfections/Changes/SSI+Maintain+Glucose+Control.htm. Accessed March 17, 2011. 25. Nicolette LH. Infection prevention and control in the perioperative setting. Alexander’s Care of the Patient in Surgery, 14th ed.; JC Rothrock, Ed. St. Louis, MO: Mosby; 2011: 93. 26. AORN. Recommended practices for hand hygiene in the perioperative setting. Perioperative Standards and Recommended Practices. Denver, CO: AORN, Inc.; 2011: 73-86. 27. AORN. Recommended practices for hand hygiene in the perioperative setting. Perioperative Standards and Recommended Practices. Denver, CO: AORN, Inc.; 2011: 73-86. 28. Nicolette LH. Infection prevention and control in the perioperative setting. Alexander’s Care of the Patient in Surgery, 14th ed.; JC Rothrock, Ed. St. Louis, MO: Mosby; 2011: 93. 29. AORN. Recommended practices for hand hygiene in the perioperative setting. Perioperative Standards and Recommended Practices. Denver, CO: AORN, Inc.; 2011: 73-86. 30. Infection Control Today. Collaboratives demonstrate gains in fighting surgical infections. Available at: http://www. infectioncontroltoday.com/articles/551topics.html. Accessed March 17, 2011. 31. Nicolette LH. Infection prevention and control in the perioperative setting. Alexander’s Care of the Patient in Surgery, 14th ed.; JC Rothrock, Ed. St. Louis, MO: Mosby; 2011: 101. 32. Mangram AJ, Horan TC, Pearson ML, Silver LC, Jarvis WR. Guideline for prevention of surgical site infection, 1999. Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology. 1999;20(4):247-278. Also available at: http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dhqp/ pdf/guidelines/SSI.pdf. Accessed March 16, 2011. 33. AORN. Recommended practices for preoperative patient skin antisepsis. Perioperative Standards and Recommended Practices. Denver, CO: AORN, Inc.; 2011: 361-379. 34. Mangram AJ, Horan TC, Pearson ML, Silver LC, Jarvis WR. Guideline for prevention of surgical site infection, 1999. Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology. 1999;20(4):247-278. Also available at: http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dhqp/ pdf/guidelines/SSI.pdf. Accessed March 17, 2011. 35. NQF. Patient safety: safe practices 2011. Available at: : http://www.qualityforum.org/News_And_Resources/Press_ Releases/2011/NQF_Maintains_Endorsement_of_Safe_Practice_to_Prevent_Surgical_Site_Infection.aspx 19 36. AORN. Recommended practices for preoperative patient skin antisepsis. Perioperative Standards and Recommended Practices. Denver, CO: AORN, Inc.; 2011: 361-379. 37. Kuehnert MJ, et al.,Prevalence of Staphylococcus aureus Nasal Colonization in the United States, 2001–2002, JID 2006;193(15 January): 172-79). 38. Kluytmans JAJW, Mouton JW, Ijzerman EPF, et al. Nasal carriage of Staphlococcus aureus as a major risk factor for wound infections after cardiac surgery. J Infect Dis 1995;171:216-219. 39. Kalmeijer MD, van Nieuwland-Bollen E, Bogaers-Hofman D, deBaere G, Kluytmans JAJW. Nasal carriage of Staphlococcus aureus as a major risk factor for surgical site infections in orthopedic surgery. Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology: 2000;21:319-323. 40. Kluytmans JA, Mouton JW, VandenBergh MF, Manders MJ, Maat AP, Wagenvoort JH, Michel MF, Verbrugh HA. Reduction of surgical-site infections in cardiothoracic surgery by elimination of nasal carriage of Staphylococcus aureus. Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology. 1996;17(12):780-785. 41. van Rijen M, Bonten M, Wenzel R, Kluytmans J. Mupirocin ointment for preventing Staphylococcus aureus infections in nasal carriers. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2008; 8(4):CD006216. 42. Ammerlaan HSM, et al. Eradication of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Carriage: A Systematic Review. CID 2009:48:922-930.) 43. AORN. Recommended practices for maintaining a sterile field. Perioperative Standards and Recommended Practices. Denver, CO: AORN, Inc.; 2011: 87-94. 44. Mangram AJ, Horan TC, Pearson ML, Silver LC, Jarvis WR. Guideline for prevention of surgical site infection, 1999. Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology. 1999;20(4):247-278. Also available at: http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dhqp/ pdf/guidelines/SSI.pdf. Accessed March 16, 2011. 45. Mangram AJ, Horan TC, Pearson ML, Silver LC, Jarvis WR. Guideline for prevention of surgical site infection, 1999. Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology. 1999;20(4):247-278. Also available at: http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dhqp/ pdf/guidelines/SSI.pdf. Accessed March 16, 2011. 46. AORN. Recommended practices for traffic patterns in the perioperative practice setting. Perioperative Standards and Recommended Practices. Denver, CO: AORN, Inc.; 2011: 95-98. 47. AORN. Recommended practices for surgical attire. Perioperative Standards and Recommended Practices. Denver, CO: AORN, Inc.; 2011: 57-71. 48. Scaltriti S, Cencetti S, Rovesti S, Marchesi I, Bargellini A, Borella P. Risk factors for particulate and microbial contamination of air in operating theatres. Journal of Hospital Infection. 2007;66(4):320-326. 49. Mangram AJ, Horan TC, Pearson ML, Silver LC , Jarvis WR. Guideline for Prevention of Surgical Site Infection. Am J Infect Control 1999; 27:97-132. 50. Mangram AJ, Horan TC, Pearson ML, Silver LC, Jarvis WR. Guideline for prevention of surgical site infection, 1999. Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology. 1999;20(4):247-278. Also available at: http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dhqp/ pdf/guidelines/SSI.pdf. Accessed March 16, 2011. 20 Please close this window and return to the main page to proceed with taking the online test, evaluation and registration. 21