Influence of surgical scrubs outside the operation theatre on post-operative infections - A systematic review.

Background and Aims: Healthcare workers (HCWs), which include surgeons, anaesthesiologists, nurses, technicians, and other non-medical staff working in the operation theatre (OT), change to surgical scrubs for providing designated services. This study was intended to investigate the association of moving in and out of OT to other hospital areas without changing scrubs and its impact on bacterial infection. Methods: After PROSPERO registration, we performed a systematic review to compare the occurrence of surgical site infections (SSIs) with or without the movement of HCWs outside OT. We searched PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library using relevant keywords. RoB-2 and ROBINS-E tools were used to assess the risk of bias in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies, respectively. Results: We identified six articles that fulfilled the inclusion criteria: three RCTs and three observational studies. A risk of bias assessment revealed an overall low bias in the RCTs and an overall high bias in the observational studies. The analysis revealed a comparable incidence of bacterial infection in terms of colony-forming units when scrubs when HCWs moved in and out of OT with the same scrubs. A meta-analysis was not performed due to heterogeneity in participants and the OT set-up, as well as fewer studies and sample size. Conclusion: The evidence is insufficient to suggest that wearing scrubs outside the OT could increase the incidence of SSI in surgical patients or transmit the organisms to patients, causing infection. The present review neither supports nor is against wearing surgical scrubs outside OT premises.

A single plain ring is not associated with increased bacterial load on hands: An experimental study among healthcare worker students undertaking mock surgery.

BACKGROUND: Adequate hand hygiene is considered as one of the most effective strategies in healthcare-related infection prevention. The potential negative effect of rings in hand disinfection and thus, in increased nosocomial infections rates is still controversial. Therefore, the present study was designed with the purpose of examining if rings frequently exposed to surgical scrubbing were associated or not with increased bacterial counts. METHODS: 32 volunteers were randomized into 4 groups: A (no rings), B (participants wore a ring), C (no rings and performed surgical scrubbing with chlorhexidine every 48 h) and D (participants wore a ring and performed surgical scrubbing every 48 h). Glove juice samples were obtained at day 0 (T0) and after a 90-min mock-surgery on day 14 (T1). Quantitative (number of UFC/mL) and qualitative data (microorganism type) were collected as study variables. RESULTS: All groups were comparable at T0. All ring carriers obtained negative cultures at T1. Ring presence was not associated with higher bacterial counts; comparisons between A vs B groups and C vs D groups showed no statistically significant differences (p = 0.076 and 1.000). T1 negative cultures were more frequent in participants performing surgical scrubbing every second day (93.8 % vs 75 %), although this difference did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.332). CONCLUSIONS: The presence of single plain ring does not seem to be associated with an increased hand bacterial load. Regular surgical scrubbing with chlorhexidine impregnated sponges reduces bacterial contamination of hands, even in the presence of plain rings.

Reusable scrub caps are cost-effective and help reduce the climate footprint of surgery.

BACKGROUND: As the US healthcare sector contributes to 5-10% of national CO2 emissions, with a substantial contribution from surgical services, a collective effort is important to minimize the climate footprint of surgery. Solid plastic waste generated from single-use items in operating rooms is a major contributor to greenhouse gas emissions. To address this problem, we implemented a pilot study to replace single-use scrub caps with reusable caps. METHODS: Ninety-two surgical trainees at the Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, were provided reusable personalized scrub caps. Over 6 months, their use of the reusable cap was compared with corresponding use of disposable single-use caps. We then used the cost of raw materials, fabric and cap manufacturing, transportation, and end-of-life/waste treatment to perform an economic and environmental burden analysis. RESULTS: After 6 months of reusable scrub cap use, 33 participants (51.6%) reported that due to their use of a reusable scrub cap, their utilization of disposable bouffant or caps had decreased by 76-100%. This was associated with a significant reduction in the use of single-use caps after adjusting for surgical case volume. The carbon footprint of single-use scrub caps was significantly higher than reusable caps during the study period. Reusable scrub cap usage also strongly correlated with substantial reductions in energy consumption and freshwater toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: Reusable personalized cloth scrub caps are cost-effective and can help reduce surgery's carbon footprint by reducing waste generated from disposable scrub cap use. More programs should consider replacing single-use polypropylene caps with reusable scrub caps for their operating room staff.

Comparison of the effect of isopropyl alcohol and chlorhexidine solution rinses on body temperature of female cats undergoing sterilization surgery.

OBJECTIVES: Isopropyl alcohol 70% as a rinse agent for chlorhexidine scrub has been shown to decrease body temperature more quickly than chlorhexidine solution in mice prepared aseptically prior to surgery. For this reason, some high-quality, high-volume (HQHV) surgical sterilization clinics use chlorhexidine solution rather than alcohol. We sought to determine if temperature upon entry to recovery, heat loss per kg and rate of temperature decline during surgery were different between cats rinsed with chlorhexidine solution vs 70% isopropyl alcohol following surgical scrub, and if there were significant predictors of recovery temperature. METHODS: Female cats admitted for surgery to trap-neuter-return (TNR) clinics at a veterinary college were assigned chlorhexidine solution or alcohol rinse agents via block randomization. Veterinary students and veterinarians performed spay surgeries using HQHV techniques. In recovery, heat support and reversal agents were available for cats with a low body temperature or that were slow to recover. Baseline values, outcome variables and duration of each stage (preparation, surgery, recovery) were assessed using Wilcoxon rank-sum and t-tests. Recovery temperature was evaluated using random effects multiple linear regression. RESULTS: The recovery temperature, heat loss per kg, heat loss per min, need for reversal and need for heat support in recovery were not significantly different between rinse groups. Weight <2.3 kg, body condition score <4, duration of surgery and postinduction temperature were predictors of recovery temperature. The rate of heat loss in the first 30 mins of surgery was slightly lower for cats in the alcohol rinse group and the recovery duration was shorter for cats weighing less <2.3 kg in the alcohol rinse group. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: There were no clinically meaningful differences in body temperature between chlorhexidine and alcohol rinses. Both chlorhexidine solution and isopropyl alcohol 70% are appropriate rinse agents for aseptic preparation of feline spay surgeries.

Operating Room Hand Preparation: To Scrub or to Rub?

BACKGROUND: The alcohol rub has been proposed as an alternative to the traditional surgical scrub in preparing the hands for surgical procedures. Few reviews have examined critically the evidence that favors or discredits the use of the alcohol rub instead of the traditional scrub. METHODS: A review of available published literature was undertaken to define the evidence for the best methods for hand preparation before surgical procedures. The focus of this literature review was to compare the bacteriologic and clinical outcomes of conventional surgical scrubbing of the hands compared with alcohol rubs. RESULTS: The bacteriologic studies of the hands after the conventional scrub versus the alcohol rub demonstrated consistently comparable or superior reductions in bacterial presence on the hand with the alcohol rub. Only four clinical studies were identified that compared the scrub versus the rub in the frequency of surgical site infections. No difference in surgical site infections were identified. CONCLUSIONS: The alcohol rub appears to have comparable results to the surgical scrub and is a reasonable alternative in preparation of the hands for surgical procedures.

Performance of Bio-Occlusive Dressing as Barrier Protection from Presurgical Chlorhexidine Skin Preparation.

Purpose/Aim of the study: Chlorhexdine has been shown to provide excellent and cost-effective presurgical antisepsis. However, standard presurgical concentrations of chlorhexidine (2-4%) are known to cause ocular injury, even in cases in which a bio-occlusive dressing (Tegaderm™) was applied beforehand to the closed eye. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three experiments were conducted to assess the barrier performance of Tegaderm™ to chlorhexidine skin prep in vitro and on non-ocular skin. The experiments used water as a control group. RESULTS: In the first in vitro experiment, the chlorhexidine group showed penetration at the edges of the Tegaderm™ at 5 minutes while the water (control) group never penetrated the Tegaderm™. A subsequent experiment testing the central permeability of the tegaderm showed it to be impermeable to both chlorhexidine and water after 90 minutes. In the in vivo experiment, the chlorhexidine group showed penetration at 10 minutes, while the water (control) group never penetrated the Tegaderm™. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest Tegaderm™ is permeable at the edges to chlorhexidine but not water. Based on this, along with reports of ocular injury from chlorhexidine skin preparation of the head despite prior application of Tegaderm™ over the eyes, we advise against using bio-occlusive adhesive dressing to protect the ocular surface from chlorhexidine exposure. We suggest an alternative presurgical antiseptic agent such as povidone-iodine be employed whenever possible.

Preoperative Hand Decontamination in Ophthalmic Surgery: A Comparison of the Removal of Bacteria from Surgeons' Hands by Routine Antimicrobial Scrub versus an Alcoholic Hand Rub.

PURPOSE: The goal of this experiment was to evaluate and compare the antimicrobial efficacy of routine preoperative hand washing using commercial medicated sponge brushes versus an alcoholic hand rub, by comparing bacterial growth on ophthalmic surgeons' hands after application of each of these methods. METHODS: Twenty ophthalmic surgeons were recruited at the Hadassah-Hebrew University Medical Center in Jerusalem, Israel. Samples were collected twice from the hands of each surgeon after hand decontamination using two different protocols during routine surgical practice. The routine preparation consisted of a 3-minute surgical scrub using commercial brush-sponges incorporating either 4% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) or 1% povidone-iodine (PVP-I) formulations with detergent, followed by drying the hands with a sterile towel, while the 70% ethanol solution was applied for 60-seconds and allowed to air dry. Half of the group was randomly assigned to provide samples first after the routine method and the alcoholic solution a week later, and the other half of the group was sampled in the reverse order. Viable counts of bacteria were evaluated using a modified glove juice method. Bacterial colonies were enumerated after incubation for 24 hours and expressed as colony forming units (CFU)/mL for each pair of hands. RESULTS: Geometric mean counts were 1310 and 39 CFU/mL, in the routine and alcohol rub groups, respectively, representing a mean log10 reduction in 1.53. The difference between the paired bacterial counts for the routine versus the alcohol rub was statistically significant (p < 0.0001). There was no statistically significant difference between log10 reductions for CHG and PVP-I (p = 0.97). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence that an alcohol rub protocol is more effective in reducing bacterial counts on hands than routine surgical hand preparation with PVP-I and CHG in a population of practicing ophthalmic surgeons in the operative clinical setting. Thus, it provides a safe alternative as a preoperative hand disinfection method.

Compliance of surgical hand washing before surgery: Role of remote video surveillance.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and increase the compliance of surgical hand scrubbing with periodic feedback. METHODS: This study was conducted at the Aga Khan Hospital for Women and Children, Karachi, Pakistan, from April to July 2014. A remote video auditing system consisting of human auditors was used for visualising surgical hand wash compliance of the surgical team. The equipment, which used motion sensor, was installed in the scrub area wall, visualising the scrub sink only. A clock was displayed for the healthcare professionals to aid in ensuring two-minute hand washing. All surgeons, technicians and surgical assistants were included in the study. Surgical scrubbing was measured during a 4-week period by remote video auditing without feedback and a 12-week period with feedback. SPSS 19 was used for data analysis. RESULTS: Of the 534 observations, 150(28%) were made during the pre-feedback period and 384(71.9%) during the post-feedback period. During the first 4 weeks, the overall compliance was 22(14.6%). The rate of compliance increased to 310(80.7%) during the 12-week post-feedback period. CONCLUSIONS: Video surveillance with feedback for hand washing was found to be an effective tool for measuring hand hygiene and improving compliance.

The impact of surgical hand antisepsis technique on surgical site infection.

BACKGROUND: Limited evidence exists regarding the effect on superficial and deep incisional surgical site infections (SDSSIs) of alcohol-based hand rubs (ABR) versus traditional aqueous surgical scrubs (TSS). User preferences and practice are unknown. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study examining SDSSIs using VA Surgical Quality Improvement Program cases before ABR implementation (2007-2009, TSS group) and after (2013-2014, ABR group). A descriptive survey. RESULTS: SDSSI rates were 1.8% and 1.5% for TSS (n=4051) and ABR (n=2293), respectively (p=0.31). The adjusted odds of SDSSI using ABR was not significant (OR 0.82; 95% CI, 0.51-1.32). Greatest SDSSI risk was from preoperative radiotherapy (OR, 2.78; 95% CI, 1.14-6.78), general surgery (OR, 2.39; 95% CI, 1.30-4.39) and preoperative smoking (OR, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.02-2.44). Of 95 surveys included, 52% favored ABR. Although 95% self-reported correct product application, improper duration was revealed in both groups (TSS 18% and ABR 10%). CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of an ABR for use in surgical hand antisepsis did not alter SDSSI rates. Improving product knowledge and compliance may improve SSI rates.

Corneal Injury from Presurgical Chlorhexidine Skin Preparation.

BACKGROUND: Chlorhexidine skin preparation has been shown to provide highly effective antimicrobial presurgical skin cleansing. However, there is a significant risk of ocular toxicity when it is used in periocular areas. CASE DESCRIPTION: We describe 2 cases of significant corneal damage resulting from 4% chlorhexidine gluconate preoperative skin cleanser, despite the use of protective occlusive dressing over the eyes. Because of the potential for severe corneal toxicity resulting from use of chlorhexidine, alternative agents such as 10% povidone-iodine should be considered for skin preparation near periocular areas whenever possible. CONCLUSIONS: If chlorhexidine gluconate must be employed near periocular areas, great care must be exercised to avoid contact with the eyes, and additional protective measures (e.g., absorbent eye pads along with tightly occlusive dressings) must be used whenever possible.

Comparative efficacy of alcohol-based surgical scrubs: the importance of formulation.

Alcohol-based surgical scrubs (ABSSs) are used to prevent surgical site infections. Chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) often is added to enhance persistent germicidal activity. The aim of this study was to determine the influence of ABSS product formulation on efficacy. We evaluated three commercially available ABSS formulations and one control alcohol formulation according to the surgical scrub methodology specified by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Only one ABSS formulation met FDA efficacy requirements when tested at the manufacturer's recommended dosage. In contrast, two ABSS formulations, one of which contained CHG, failed to meet the FDA acceptance criteria for a 3-log10 reduction on day 5, meaning the formulations did not sufficiently reduce bacteria levels on hands on the fifth day of product application. The data suggest that recommendations to include CHG in ABSS formulations should be reconsidered, and product efficacy, skin tolerability, and user acceptability should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

Are we following the WHO recommendations for surgical scrubbing?

BACKGROUND: Surgical site infections have an incidence as high as 10%. To reduce this, the World Health Organisation (WHO) recommends guidelines for surgical scrubbing. AIMS: We assessed adherence of surgical staff scrub practice before gowning to current WHO recommendations. METHODS: A prospective study conducted in operation theatres in a university hospital. Participants comprised of consultant surgeons, trainees and scrub nurses. Variables included staff grade, scrub order, length of scrub time and appropriate dress code. Data were collected anonymously and analysed. RESULTS: We assessed 303 surgical scrub-episodes (95 scrub nurses, 123 trainees and 85 consultant surgeons). Mean time for first scrub of the day was 239 s, SD = 99, 95% CI 218, 259 and range = 530 (scrub nurses = 297 s, trainees = 204 s, consultant surgeons = 202 s). Mean time for subsequent scrubs was 161 s, SD = 63, 95% CI 152, 170, range = 312 (scrub nurses = 184 s, trainees = 158 s, consultant surgeons = 143 s). Statistical significance was found between staff grades based on scrub time, with WHO breaches in remaining variables. CONCLUSIONS: No written local guidelines on hand scrubbing exist in the hospital and staff were unaware of WHO guidelines. In this study, mean scrub times were less than WHO guidelines with significant variation in practice across grades of staff. Clear written guidelines are needed.

New method for assessing hand disinfection shows that pre-operative alcohol/chlorhexidine rub is as effective as a traditional surgical scrub.

BACKGROUND: Several studies have shown that rubbing hands with an alcohol/chlorhexidine solution provides equivalent microbial decontamination to a conventional surgical scrub using aqueous chlorhexidine. However, the authors believe that these studies have methodological flaws that limit their applicability to the operating theatre environment. As such, a method was developed to compare products in an everyday operating theatre environment using working operating theatre personnel. AIM: To determine whether or not an alcohol/chlorhexidine rub is as efficacious as a traditional surgical scrub using a novel method. METHODS: Bacterial counts at baseline were collected from 20 anaesthetists using the glove juice method. Subsequently, with sequential exchange of sterile gloves, one hand underwent a 3-min scrub using 4% aqueous chlorhexidine, and the other hand underwent a 60-s rub with a 70% isopropyl alcohol/0.5% chlorhexidine solution. The residual bacterial count was collected for each hand after 30 min using the glove juice method. These counts were converted to log10 values to compare the baseline counts of right and left hands, and efficacy between the treatment groups. FINDINGS: Mean [± standard deviation (SD)] bacterial counts at baseline were (log10) 4.42 ± 0.81 for left hands and 4.64 ± 0.60 for right hands (P > 0.05). The mean (± SD) reduction from baseline was (log10) 1.45 ± 0.50 for 4% chlorhexidine and 2.01 ± 0.98 for alcohol/chlorhexidine (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: An alcohol/chlorhexidine hand rub was found to be as efficacious as a traditional scrub after 30 min; this study differs from previous work as it was undertaken in a population of practising anaesthetists in their working environment. The McKenzie method allows baseline and study evaluations to be performed contemporaneously on the same individual. Each subject was his/her own control. This method offers a more clinically relevant way to compare disinfectant solutions than standard methods.