Bacterial skin recolonization in the operating room: comparison between various antisepsis protocols.

BACKGROUND: Surgical site infection (SSI) largely implicates the patient's endogenous skin microbiota. Perioperative disinfection protocols do not follow a general agreement. AIM: To compare antisepsis and skin protection protocols on quantitative analysis of recolonization in the operating room at regular time-steps. The study hypothesis was that one protocol would be more effective than others. METHODS: A single-centre prospective interventional study was conducted between January and June 2019. Healthy volunteers were randomized between protocols and served as their own controls. The protocols began ahead of scheduled orthopaedic surgery with a preoperative shower, mechanical cleansing, application of major antiseptics (alcoholic Bétadine™ 5% or alcoholic chlorhexidine 0.5%), sterile draping, then adhesive draping (3M™ Steri-Drape™ or iodine-impregnated 3M™ Ioban2™). Sampling was by swabbing in the operating room at 30 min intervals up to 90 min after draping. Cultures were performed under aerobic and anaerobic conditions. Qualitative and quantitative (cfu/mL) bacteriology was performed in the laboratory by direct reading on the blood agar plates. FINDINGS: Thirty subjects were included; none was lost to follow-up or excluded from analysis. Bacterial load before manipulation (T0) was significantly higher in males (P < 0.0001) despite a significantly shorter shower-to-sampling interval (P = 0.03). Smoking (P = 0.85), body mass index (P = 0.38), and depilation (P = 0.50) did not significantly affect preoperative load. Mean load increased significantly under all protocols up to T90 min, without significant superiority for any one protocol. Associated Bétadine™/Ioban™ showed the lowest T90 load, and chlorhexidine alone the highest, but without significant difference. Isolates at T0 were predominantly healthy skin commensals: coagulase-negative staphylococci, micrococci, and coryneforms. CONCLUSION: No one protocol demonstrated superiority, whether in immediate bactericidal action or in preventing skin recolonization in the operating room. Further studies are needed to define generally agreed protocols for SSI risk management.

Prepping for Prevention: An Intervention to Optimize Skin Antisepsis and Peri-Operative Antibiotic Prophylaxis.

Background: The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommend bathing prior to surgery, surgical skin antisepsis, peri-operative antibiotic administration, normothermia throughout the procedure, serum glucose concentration <200 mg/dL throughout the procedure, and hyperoxygenation in the immediate post-operative period to prevent surgical site infection (SSI). We developed interventions to standardize skin antisepsis and peri-operative antibiotic administration at our institution. Methods: This is a cross-sectional evaluation of surgical skin antisepsis and antibiotic administration before and after a series of interventions designed to standardize the processes. Results: One hundred twenty-four surgical skin antisepsis opportunities were observed; significant improvement was seen in hand hygiene prior to performing skin antisepsis (compliance changing from 1% to 48%; p < 0.001), sleeves being worn during skin antisepsis (1% versus 67%; p < 0.001), use of the correct cleansing time (47% versus 85%; p < 0.001), allowance for adequate drying time (67% versus 87%; p = 0.02), and use of a cleansing motion from the incision to the periphery (78% versus 95%; p = 0.004). Pre-operative antibiotic order placement, correct antibiotic selection, and optimal antibiotic dose were evaluated in 466 surgical procedures. Significant improvement was seen in both peri-operative order placement (59% versus 70%; p = 0.02) and correct antibiotic selection (52% versus 95%; p < 0.001). Conclusion: An intervention to standardize skin antisepsis and to encourage early ordering of peri-operative antibiotics was successful.

Basics of Sterile Compounding. Quality Assurance and Quality Control: Being Prepared for U.S. Food and Drug Administration Inspections and Staying in Compliance with United States Pharmacopeia Chapter <797>: Part 2.

Compounders engaged in making sterile preparations need to employ a quality-assurance system of documented policies and procedures to attempt to reduce the possibility of contamination. The quality-assurance program will be monitored through the facility's quality-control system. Compounders should be aware of the requirements of each state they are licensed in as well as the inspection observations commonly noted in 483s issued by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Part 1 of this 2-part article discussed the currently evolving regulatory environment and why sterile compounding requires planning and monitoring to deliver quality compounds to patients. Part 2 examines the United States Pharmacopeia's discussion on the principles of quality assurance and quality control in sterile compounding.

Guideline Implementation: Hand Hygiene.

Performing proper hand hygiene and surgical hand antisepsis is essential to reducing the rates of health care-associated infections, including surgical site infections. The updated AORN "Guideline for hand hygiene" provides guidance on hand hygiene and surgical hand antisepsis, the wearing of fingernail polish and artificial nails, proper skin care to prevent dermatitis, the wearing of jewelry, hand hygiene product selection, and quality assurance and performance improvement considerations. This article focuses on key points of the guideline to help perioperative personnel make informed decisions about hand hygiene and surgical hand antisepsis. The key points address the necessity of keeping fingernails and skin healthy, not wearing jewelry on the hands or wrists in the perioperative area, properly performing hand hygiene and surgical hand antisepsis, and involving patients and visitors in hand hygiene initiatives. Perioperative RNs should review the complete guideline for additional information and for guidance when writing and updating policies and procedures.

Clinical effectiveness of platelets in additive solution treated with two commercial pathogen-reduction technologies.

BACKGROUND: Two noninferiority, randomized, controlled trials were conducted in parallel comparing the safety and efficacy of platelets treated with Intercept or Mirasol pathogen-reduction technologies versus standard platelets. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: The primary endpoint was the percentage of hematology patients who developed World Health Organization Grade 2 or greater bleeding. A noninferiority margin of 11% was chosen based on expected Grade 2 or greater bleeding in 20% of controls. The study was closed for financial restrictions before reaching the planned sample size of 828 patients, and an intention-to-treat analysis was conducted on 424 evaluable patients. RESULTS: In the Intercept trial (113 treated vs. 115 control patients), the absolute risk difference in Grade 2 or greater bleeding was 6.1%, with an upper one-sided 97.5% confidence limit of 19.2%. The absolute risk difference in the Mirasol trial (99 treated vs. 97 control patients) was 4.1%, and the upper one-sided 97.5% confidence limit was 18.4%. Neither absolute risk difference was statistically significant. In both trials, posttransfusion platelet count increments were significantly lower in treated versus control patients. Mean blood component use in treated patients versus controls was 54% higher (95% confidence interval, 36%-74%; Intercept) and 34% higher (95% confidence interval, 16%-54%; Mirasol) for platelets and 23% higher (95% confidence interval, 8%-39%; Intercept) and 32% higher (95% confidence interval, 10%-57%; Mirasol) for red blood cells. Unexpected reactions and adverse events were not reported. Mortality did not differ significantly between treated and control patients. CONCLUSION: Although conclusions on noninferiority could not be drawn due to low statistical power, the study provides additional information on the safety and efficacy of pathogen-reduced platelets treated with two commercial pathogen-reduction technologies.

Acquired resistance to chlorhexidine - is it time to establish an 'antiseptic stewardship' initiative?

Chlorhexidine digluconate (CHG) is an antimicrobial agent used for different types of applications in hand hygiene, skin antisepsis, oral care, and patient washing. Increasing use raises concern regarding development of acquired bacterial resistance. Published data from clinical isolates with CHG minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) were reviewed and compared to epidemiological cut-off values to determine resistance. CHG resistance is rarely found in Escherichia coli, Salmonella spp., Staphylococcus aureus or coagulase-negative staphylococci. In Enterobacter spp., Pseudomonas spp., Proteus spp., Providencia spp. and Enterococcus spp., however, isolates are more often CHG resistant. CHG resistance may be detected in multi-resistant isolates such as extremely drug-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae. Isolates with a higher MIC are often less susceptible to CHG for disinfection. Although cross-resistance to antibiotics remains controversial, some studies indicate that the overall exposure to CHG increases the risk for resistance to some antibiotic agents. Resistance to CHG has resulted in numerous outbreaks and healthcare-associated infections. On an average intensive care unit, most of the CHG exposure would be explained by hand hygiene agents when liquid soaps or alcohol-based hand rubs contain CHG. Exposure to sub-lethal CHG concentration may enhance resistance in Acinetobacter spp., K. pneumoniae, and Pseudomonas spp., all species well known for emerging antibiotic resistance. In order to reduce additional selection pressure in nosocomial pathogens it seems to make sense to restrict the valuable agent CHG to those indications with a clear patient benefit and to eliminate it from applications without any benefit or with a doubtful benefit.

Recomendaciones prácticas para la antisepsia y desinfección / Practical recommendation for antisepsis and disinfection

Se presenta una breve revisión de los antisépticos y desinfectantes más comunes, su utilidad, la forma de aplicarlos y de almacenamiento en los distintos servicios hospitalarios. Además se incluye el manejo, limpieza y aseo de las distintas áreas clínicas.

The present manuscript introduces a short revision of most commonly antiseptic and disinfectant used in health services, includes its utility, way to use and storage. Furthermore adds the management and cleaning of the multiple clinical areas.

[Principles of antisepsis, disinfection and sterilization]. / Fundamentos de antisepsia, desinfección y esterilización.

This article aims to provide a brief review of the main concepts on which the prevention and control of infection are based. Antisepsis comprises a set of techniques aimed at the total sterilization, or at most, disinfection, removing germs that contaminate an environment. Both procedures must be preceded by an environmental cleanup in the location in which they intend to be applied. The disinfection is carried out using biocides or germicides. Antimicrobial chemicals, that have mechanisms of action and resistances very similar to antibiotics, are generating concern due to the possibility of crossing genetic information that aggravates the problem of bacterial resistance. Most biocides can act as antiseptics, and applied to skin tissue, or disinfectants on inanimate materials. The spectrum of action of germicides depends on the product itself and external controllable factors: temperature, concentration, exposure time, etc. Sterilization techniques are primarily physical, by exposing the material to steam, or sterilizing gas, using autoclaves. Major advances are the use of low temperatures with shorter exposure times, in parallel with technological advances in instrumentation in order to avoid high temperatures and high use rotations due to workload.

Baseline measure of alcohol-based skin preparation agents before 2011 National Quality Forum recommendation in a general surgery population.

The National Quality Forum (2011) recommends the use of alcohol-based skin preparation agents before surgery to help prevent infections. This multihospital study (n = 3,794) evaluates its use in a general surgery patient population before the National Quality Forum recommendation. Forty-seven percent of cases received an alcohol-based skin preparation agent.

High-level disinfection, sterilization, and antisepsis: current issues in reprocessing medical and surgical instruments.

Technology is rapidly changing many aspects of health care. The intricate design of instruments, the configuration of instrument trays, and evidence-based practice have resulted in the need for complicated and specific reprocessing recommendations from instrument manufacturers. Patient safety depends on instruments that are appropriately cared for and adequately reprocessed. This article covers current issues that sterile processing and operating room professionals must deal with regarding reprocessing of medical and surgical instruments.

Quality improvement: single-field sterile scrub, prep, and dwell for laparoscopic hysterectomy.

The vulva and vaginal interior are considered a contaminated surgical area, and current OR guidelines require surgeons who are gloved and gowned at the abdominal field to avoid contact with the urethral catheter, the uterine manipulator, and the introitus or to change their gloves and even regown if contact occurs. It is our belief that the perception of the vaginal field as contaminated reflects a lack of specific standards for the preoperative cleansing of the deeper vagina and a lack of preoperative prep instructions for the combined fields. We developed a comprehensive single-field prep technique designed to improve surgical efficiency and prevent contamination of the sterile field. Combining a methodical scrub, prep, and dwell, this technique allows the entire abdomino-perineovaginal field to be treated as a single sterile field for laparoscopic procedures. Our surgical site infection rate of 1.8% when using this single-field prep technique and the subsequent surgical treatment of the abdominal, vaginal, and perineal fields as a single sterile field is well within reported norms.

Factors affecting microbial contamination rate of cord blood collected for transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Collection and processing of cord blood (CB) is associated with significant risk of microbial contamination and hence relevant standards mandate microbial screening of the final product. This study aimed to determine the contamination rate and associated risk factors during 14 years of banking at the Sydney Cord Blood Bank. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: CB was collected and processed using a closed system and tested for contamination using blood culture bottles (BacT/ALERT, bioMérieux) incubated for a minimum of 5 days. Four microbial screening methods were used with different combinations of inoculated bottles (adult or pediatric) and associated sample volumes (10 or 1 mL). RESULTS: Of 13,344 CB units screened, 537 (4.0%) tested positive for contamination, with Bacteroides spp. (20.9%), Staphylococcus spp. (18.6%), and Propionibacterium spp. (13.7%) being the most common isolates. The contamination rate reduced from 10% in 1997 to 1.1% in 2009. Multivariate analysis demonstrated the following variables were independently associated with higher contamination rates: vaginal delivery, collection by obstetric staff, and use of an anaerobic bottle in addition to an aerobic bottle (which facilitated a larger sample inoculation volume than pediatric bottles). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that contamination rates of CB collected for transplantation can be substantially reduced by collection after cesarean delivery and utilizing trained CB collection staff. These data also indicate that the common practice of testing using a pediatric (aerobic) bottle with its attendant small volume of the final CB product may be suboptimal for sensitive detection of contaminating anaerobic microbes.

[Infection prevention check-in and infection prevention check-out to prevent nosocomial infections]. / Infektionspräventions-Check-in und Infektionspräventions-Check-out zur Prävention nosokomialer Infektionen.

BACKGROUND: A precondition for the success of the prevention of SSI is the complete realisation of the proven anti-infective measures in form of the multi-barrier strategy or the so-called bundles. In daily practice it is important to follow the fixed instructions, i. e., to ensure a high compliance. MATERIAL AND METHOD: In much the same way as an airline pilot or co-pilot must examine whether all instruments are functioning before each take-off, a comparable procedure should be developed as a pre-operative control for the observance of all -defined measures by the responsible surgeon and for the post-operative supervision by the patient. RESULTS: For the control of the observance of the defined pre-operative prevention measures, a check list with 12 items was developed, named the "infection prevention check-in". The check list is authorised by the responsible surgeon be-fore each operation. For the surveillance of the general hygiene in the post-operative period the "infection prevention check-out" with 14 items was developed. Thereby the patient is able to evaluate the staff's compliance with the hygienic measures at the time of dismissal. CONCLUSION: With the introduction of the check-lists a simple means is given to involve both the team of the surgeons and the ward staff, together with the patient, into the infection prophylaxis even more effectively. In order to assess the success of those measures, the influence on the rate of SSI is to be determined prospectively.

E-learning may improve adherence to alcohol-based hand rubbing: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Since 2004, we have promoted alcohol-based hand rubbing (HR) with an e-learning program (ELP) among hospital staff. This study sought to determine whether an ELP improves adherence to correct HR. METHODS: This was a cohort study of staff members at Aarhus University Hospital, Skejby, Denmark who completed the ELP and were repeatedly observed for correct HR before and after clinical procedures in 2006 and/or 2007. RESULTS: Of the 496 participants, 13% completed the ELP in both 2006 and 2007, 29% completed the ELP only in 2006, 15% completed the ELP only in 2007, and 43% never completed the ELP. Compared with noncompleters, completers of the 2006 and 2007 ELP had a significantly higher adherence to correct HR both before clinical procedures (odds ratio [OR] = 1.54; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.11 to 2.13) and after clinical procedures (OR = 1.40; 95% CI = 1.03 to 1.89). Time since completing the ELP seemed to be inversely associated with adherence to correct HR. CONCLUSION: Completion of an ELP may have a positive impact on the performance of correct HR. The demands of lifelong education and training of hospital staff may call for the use of an ELP as a supplement to existing efforts aimed at improving HR to help prevent health care-related infections.

Peripheral blood culture contamination in adults and venepuncture technique: prospective cohort study.

AIMS: To test the hypothesis that compliance with a hospital protocol on peripheral blood culture (PBC) collection in adults is associated with a reduction in PBC contamination, and to investigate likely contributing factors for contamination. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was conducted, utilising data collection by participant questionnaire completion, and utilising bacteriology laboratory results on PBCs. Participants were all healthcare workers involved in obtaining PBCs from adults. RESULTS: 1460 PBCs with questionnaires were received. Contamination among the 1460 PBCs as a whole was 8.8%. 766 of the questionnaires were sufficiently complete to allow analysis of blood culture contamination in relation to protocol compliance. Among these, protocol compliance was 30% and contamination was 8.0%. When the protocol was complied with, 2.6% of PBCs were contaminated, but when the protocol was not followed, contamination was significantly higher at 10.3% (OR 4.35, 95% CI 1.84 to 12.54). Univariate analysis on all 1460 PBCs suggested that the site for blood collection, and disinfection of the venepuncture site were important factors in PBC contamination: when no venepuncture site disinfection was performed, contamination was significantly higher than when alcohol was used (5.1% versus 15.8%, OR 3.46, 95% CI 2.01 to 5.97); when a PBC collection site other than a fresh peripheral vein was used, contamination was significantly higher (7.3% versus 12.0%, OR 1.75, 95% CI 1.03 to 2.96). CONCLUSIONS: Compliance with a hospital protocol on PBC collection technique in adults significantly reduces blood culture contamination.