Healthcare team resilience during COVID-19: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Resilience, in the field of Resilience Engineering, has been identified as the ability to maintain the safety and the performance of healthcare systems and is aligned with the resilience potentials of anticipation, monitoring, adaptation, and learning. In early 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic challenged the resilience of US healthcare systems due to the lack of equipment, supply interruptions, and a shortage of personnel. The purpose of this qualitative research was to describe resilience in the healthcare team during the COVID-19 pandemic with the healthcare team situated as a cognizant, singular source of knowledge and defined by its collective identity, purpose, competence, and actions, versus the resilience of an individual or an organization. METHODS: We developed a descriptive model which considered the healthcare team as a unified cognizant entity within a system designed for safe patient care. This model combined elements from the Patient Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) and the Advanced Team Decision Making (ADTM) models. Using a qualitative descriptive design and guided by our adapted model, we conducted individual interviews with healthcare team members across the United States. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis and extracted codes were organized within the adapted model framework. RESULTS: Five themes were identified from the interviews with acute care professionals across the US (N = 22): teamwork in a pressure cooker, consistent with working in a high stress environment; healthcare team cohesion, applying past lessons to present challenges, congruent with transferring past skills to current situations; knowledge gaps, and altruistic behaviors, aligned with sense of duty and personal responsibility to the team. Participants' described how their ability to adapt to their environment was negatively impacted by uncertainty, inconsistent communication of information, and emotions of anxiety, fear, frustration, and stress. Cohesion with co-workers, transferability of skills, and altruistic behavior enhanced healthcare team performance. CONCLUSION: Working within the extreme unprecedented circumstances of COVID-19 affected the ability of the healthcare team to anticipate and adapt to the rapidly changing environment. Both team cohesion and altruistic behavior promoted resilience. Our research contributes to a growing understanding of the importance of resilience in the healthcare team. And provides a bridge between individual and organizational resilience.

Re-Aiming Equity Evaluation in Clinical Decision Support: A Scoping Review of Equity Assessments in Surgical Decision Support Systems.

OBJECTIVE: We critically evaluated the surgical literature to explore the prevalence and describe how equity assessments occur when using clinical decision support systems. BACKGROUND: Clinical decision support (CDS) systems are increasingly used to facilitate surgical care delivery. Despite formal recommendations to do so, equity evaluations are not routinely performed on CDS systems and underrepresented populations are at risk of harm and further health disparities. We explored surgical literature to determine frequency and rigor of CDS equity assessments and offer recommendations to improve CDS equity by appending existing frameworks. METHODS: We performed a scoping review up to Augus 25, 2021 using PubMed and Google Scholar for the following search terms: clinical decision support, implementation, RE-AIM, Proctor, Proctor's framework, equity, trauma, surgery, surgical. We identified 1415 citations and 229 abstracts met criteria for review. A total of 84 underwent full review after 145 were excluded if they did not assess outcomes of an electronic CDS tool or have a surgical use case. RESULTS: Only 6% (5/84) of surgical CDS systems reported equity analyses, suggesting that current methods for optimizing equity in surgical CDS are inadequate. We propose revising the RE-AIM framework to include an Equity element (RE 2 -AIM) specifying that CDS foundational analyses and algorithms are performed or trained on balanced datasets with sociodemographic characteristics that accurately represent the CDS target population and are assessed by sensitivity analyses focused on vulnerable subpopulations. CONCLUSION: Current surgical CDS literature reports little with respect to equity. Revising the RE-AIM framework to include an Equity element (RE 2 -AIM) promotes the development and implementation of CDS systems that, at minimum, do not worsen healthcare disparities and possibly improve their generalizability.

Artificial Intelligence-enabled Decision Support in Surgery: State-of-the-art and Future Directions.

OBJECTIVE: To summarize state-of-the-art artificial intelligence-enabled decision support in surgery and to quantify deficiencies in scientific rigor and reporting. BACKGROUND: To positively affect surgical care, decision-support models must exceed current reporting guideline requirements by performing external and real-time validation, enrolling adequate sample sizes, reporting model precision, assessing performance across vulnerable populations, and achieving clinical implementation; the degree to which published models meet these criteria is unknown. METHODS: Embase, PubMed, and MEDLINE databases were searched from their inception to September 21, 2022 for articles describing artificial intelligence-enabled decision support in surgery that uses preoperative or intraoperative data elements to predict complications within 90 days of surgery. Scientific rigor and reporting criteria were assessed and reported according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. RESULTS: Sample size ranged from 163-2,882,526, with 8/36 articles (22.2%) featuring sample sizes of less than 2000; 7 of these 8 articles (87.5%) had below-average (<0.83) area under the receiver operating characteristic or accuracy. Overall, 29 articles (80.6%) performed internal validation only, 5 (13.8%) performed external validation, and 2 (5.6%) performed real-time validation. Twenty-three articles (63.9%) reported precision. No articles reported performance across sociodemographic categories. Thirteen articles (36.1%) presented a framework that could be used for clinical implementation; none assessed clinical implementation efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: Artificial intelligence-enabled decision support in surgery is limited by reliance on internal validation, small sample sizes that risk overfitting and sacrifice predictive performance, and failure to report confidence intervals, precision, equity analyses, and clinical implementation. Researchers should strive to improve scientific quality.

Surgery and the Smartphone: Can Technology Improve Equitable Access to Surgical Care?

Unfortunately, many patients in the United States experience disparities in access to surgical care, including geographic constraints, limited transportation and time, and financial hardships. Living in a "surgical care desert" results in a delay in care, driving up health care costs and reducing quality of care. In the age of COVID-19, patient access to health care has been further diminished by physical distancing guidelines, naturally increasing the need for innovative telehealth solutions. In this review, we focus on using smartphones for mobile health technology (mHealth) in the delivery of surgical care. This study is aimed at a general surgical audience that may be interested in exploring how mHealth can improve both access and health care quality for surgical patients and their families. We review the current uses of mHealth by surgeons for surgical site infection, new models of the perioperative surgical home, acute care surgical triage, remote patient monitoring devices, and evaluation and management of surgical consultations in the patient's home. We also review institutional and governmental barriers to the adoption of mHealth and offer some preliminary solutions that may aid the surgeon who wishes to implement this technology in their day-to-day practice.

Wound Care Follow-Up From the Emergency Department Using a Mobile Application: A Pilot Study.

BACKGROUND: Many patients presenting to emergency departments (EDs) do not have primary care and risk being lost to follow-up. Technology has been used successfully in surgical populations for wound care follow-up yet this is not well studied in ED populations. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to conduct a pilot study demonstrating "smartphone" application-based follow-up after wound care in the ED. METHODS: We enrolled participants in 2 urban EDs using a smartphone application called Mobile Post-Operative Wound Evaluator (mPOWEr) and defined participation as photographic submission at any time during the study period. We collected demographic data, frequency of use of mPOWEr, number of photographs uploaded, and timing of uploads. RESULTS: We approached patients for study enrollment, and 67 patients (28%) were not enrolled because they had no access to a smartphone. Seventy-one patients (30%) declined to enroll, leaving 100 (42%) successfully enrolled. Smartphone ownership was more common among patients <40 years of age (81% vs. 64%, p = 0.004), more common among white patients than nonwhite patients (75% vs. 15%, p = 0.046), more common among patients approached at the university medical center than the trauma center (84% vs. 66%, p = 0.003), and among patients with commercial or other insurance than those with Medicare or Medicaid (92% vs. 54%, p < 0.001). Of those enrolled, 58% submitted a photograph. CONCLUSIONS: Patients presenting for wound care to the ED will participate in smartphone-based app communication for wound care follow-up and are satisfied with this option. Disparities in smartphone access must be considered when using this follow-up method.

Trial of short-course antimicrobial therapy for intraabdominal infection.

BACKGROUND: The successful treatment of intraabdominal infection requires a combination of anatomical source control and antibiotics. The appropriate duration of antimicrobial therapy remains unclear. METHODS: We randomly assigned 518 patients with complicated intraabdominal infection and adequate source control to receive antibiotics until 2 days after the resolution of fever, leukocytosis, and ileus, with a maximum of 10 days of therapy (control group), or to receive a fixed course of antibiotics (experimental group) for 4±1 calendar days. The primary outcome was a composite of surgical-site infection, recurrent intraabdominal infection, or death within 30 days after the index source-control procedure, according to treatment group. Secondary outcomes included the duration of therapy and rates of subsequent infections. RESULTS: Surgical-site infection, recurrent intraabdominal infection, or death occurred in 56 of 257 patients in the experimental group (21.8%), as compared with 58 of 260 patients in the control group (22.3%) (absolute difference, -0.5 percentage point; 95% confidence interval [CI], -7.0 to 8.0; P=0.92). The median duration of antibiotic therapy was 4.0 days (interquartile range, 4.0 to 5.0) in the experimental group, as compared with 8.0 days (interquartile range, 5.0 to 10.0) in the control group (absolute difference, -4.0 days; 95% CI, -4.7 to -3.3; P<0.001). No significant between-group differences were found in the individual rates of the components of the primary outcome or in other secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with intraabdominal infections who had undergone an adequate source-control procedure, the outcomes after fixed-duration antibiotic therapy (approximately 4 days) were similar to those after a longer course of antibiotics (approximately 8 days) that extended until after the resolution of physiological abnormalities. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health; STOP-IT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00657566.).

Impact of Intravenous Immunoglobulin on Survival in Necrotizing Fasciitis With Vasopressor-Dependent Shock: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis From 130 US Hospitals.

BACKGROUND: Shock frequently complicates necrotizing fasciitis (NF) caused by group A Streptococcus (GAS) or Staphylococcus aureus. Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) is sometimes administered for presumptive toxic shock syndrome (TSS), but its frequency of use and efficacy are unclear. METHODS: Adult patients with NF and vasopressor-dependent shock undergoing surgical debridement from 2010 to 2014 were identified at 130 US hospitals. IVIG cases were propensity-matched and risk-adjusted. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality and the secondary outcome was median length of stay (LOS). RESULTS: Of 4127 cases of debrided NF with shock at 121 centers, only 164 patients (4%) at 61 centers received IVIG. IVIG subjects were younger with lower comorbidity indices, but higher illness severity. Clindamycin and vasopressor intensity were higher among IVIG cases, as was coding for TSS and GAS. In-hospital mortality did not differ between matched IVIG and non-IVIG groups (crude mortality, 27.3% vs 23.6%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.00 [95% confidence interval, .55-1.83]; P = .99). Early IVIG (≤2 days) did not alter this effect (P = .99). Among patients coded for TSS, GAS, and/or S. aureus, IVIG use was still unusual (59/868 [6.8%]) and lacked benefit (P = .63). Median LOS was similar between IVIG and non-IVIG groups (26 [13-49] vs 26 [11-43]; P = .84). Positive predictive values for identifying true NF and debridement among IVIG cases using our algorithms were 97% and 89%, respectively, based on records review at 4 hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: Adjunctive IVIG was administered infrequently in NF with shock and had no apparent impact on mortality or hospital LOS beyond that achieved with debridement and antibiotics.

Outcomes in necrotizing soft tissue infections treated with therapeutic plasma exchange.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of necrotizing soft tissue infections (NSTIs) includes prompt surgical debridement and antibiotics, but despite standard care, the morbidity and mortality remain high. Since therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) has been considered for treatment of severe sepsis, this study evaluates the efficacy of TPE for patients with NSTI. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This is a retrospective study of patients with diagnosis of NSTI who received treatment with and without TPE over an 11-year period. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: Fifty-two patients with NSTI treated with TPE (TPE group) and 125 patients with NSTI not treated with TPE (non-TPE group) were assessed. Nineteen (36.5%) patients died in the TPE group, and 35 (28%) patients died in the non-TPE group. Within the TPE group, there was significant improvement in white blood cell (WBC) count and sodium levels 7 days after TPE treatment, but no improvement in creatinine. Inverse probability weighting based on propensity scores was used to compare survival in the TPE and non-TPE groups and demonstrated that TPE was associated with an increased odds of death (odds ratio, 2.8). A second analysis matched for six variables yielded 31 pairs and demonstrated no significant difference in mortality or length of stay. CONCLUSIONS: This study describes the largest series of patients with NSTIs treated with TPE and showed no evidence of clinical benefit. Further carefully designed studies with meaningful clinical endpoints would prove useful in assessing reproducibility and determining if there is a role for TPE in other forms of severe sepsis.

Sex- and diagnosis-dependent differences in mortality and admission cytokine levels among patients admitted for intensive care.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the role of sex on cytokine expression and mortality in critically ill patients. DESIGN: A cohort of patients admitted to were enrolled and followed over a 5-year period. SETTING: Two university-affiliated hospital surgical and trauma ICUs. PATIENTS: Patients 18 years old and older admitted for at least 48 hours to the surgical or trauma ICU. INTERVENTIONS: Observation only. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Major outcomes included admission cytokine levels, prevalence of ICU-acquired infection, and mortality during hospitalization conditioned on trauma status and sex. The final cohort included 2,291 patients (1,407 trauma and 884 nontrauma). The prevalence of ICU-acquired infection was similar for men (46.5%) and women (44.5%). All-cause in-hospital mortality was 12.7% for trauma male patient and 9.1% for trauma female patient (p = 0.065) and 22.9% for nontrauma male patients and 20.6% for nontrauma female patients (p = 0.40). Among trauma patients, logistic regression analysis identified female sex as protective for all-cause mortality (odds ratio, 0.57). Among trauma patients, men had significantly higher admission serum levels of interleukin-2, interleukin-12, interferon-γ, and tumor necrosis factor-α, and among nontrauma patients, men had higher admission levels of interleukin-8 and tumor necrosis factor-α. CONCLUSIONS: The relationship between sex and outcomes in critically ill patients is complex and depends on underlying illness. Women appear to be better adapted to survive traumatic events, while sex may be less important in other forms of critical illness. The mechanisms accounting for this gender dimorphism may, in part, involve differential cytokine responses to injury, with men expressing a more robust proinflammatory profile.

Moving beyond survival as a measure of success: understanding the patient experience of necrotizing soft-tissue infections.

BACKGROUND: Necrotizing soft tissue infections (NSTIs) represent a devastating spectrum of disease with high case mortality and resource intensive care. Treatment consists of wide surgical debridement and often prolonged periods of intensive care unit care. Major complications are common. The severity of the disease and the aggressive treatment requirements put survivors at risk for significant long-term sequelae related to the trauma of both disease and treatment. Information about the postdischarge impact of NSTIs on survivors is extremely limited. Qualitative approaches are typically used to explore new phenomena and to capture individuals' thoughts, feelings, or interpretations of meaning and process. Therefore, qualitative methods are ideally suited for hypothesis generation to guide future quantitative study and ensure measured outcomes are patient-centered. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Semistructured interviews were conducted with survivors of NSTIs from a single regional referral center. Stratified purposive sampling was used to select interview candidates based on severity of illness. Descriptive thematic analysis was performed to identify major themes described by the patients. RESULTS: Interviews with 18 survivors identified three primary domains of experience: (1) individual factors, (2) relational factors, and (3) societal factors. These domains were split into the following two categories: factors effecting the disease process and recovery, and factors that were outcomes of the disease process. Each category yielded between one and seven themes. Themes identified included physical, psychological, relationship, and employment aspects. CONCLUSIONS: Patient's reported quality of life was significantly affected by their disease and recovery. The results demonstrate that many outcomes of importance for patients are not easily assessed by traditional measures of outcomes. This work illustrates the multidimensional nature of recovery from critical illness, and shows that it represents a massive transition period in the lives of survivors that affects the patient, their family, and the patient's ability to interact with society. Interviews with survivors ensure that the patient voice is heard before developing tools to assess long-term outcomes.

Impact of Digital Health upon the Surgical Patient Experience: The Patient as Consumer.

The adoption of digital health services in surgical care delivery is changing the patient experience. The goal of patient-generated health data monitoring incorporated with patient-centered education and feedback is to optimally prepare patients for surgery and personalize postoperative care to improve outcomes that matter to both patients and surgeons. Challenges include the need for the adoption of new methods for implementation and evaluation and equitable application of surgical digital health interventions, with considerations for accessibility as well as the development of new diagnostics and decision support that include the needs and characteristics of all populations served.

Declaration on infection prevention and management in global surgery.

Surgeons in their daily practice are at the forefront in preventing and managing infections. However, among surgeons, appropriate measures of infection prevention and management are often disregarded. The lack of awareness of infection and prevention measures has marginalized surgeons from this battle. Together, the Global Alliance for Infections in Surgery (GAIS), the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES), the Surgical Infection Society (SIS), the Surgical Infection Society-Europe (SIS-E), the World Surgical Infection Society (WSIS), the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST), and the Panamerican Trauma Society (PTS) have jointly completed an international declaration, highlighting the threat posed by antimicrobial resistance globally and the need for preventing and managing infections appropriately across the surgical pathway. The authors representing these surgical societies call all surgeons around the world to participate in this global cause by pledging support for this declaration for maintaining the effectiveness of current and future antibiotics.

Trial Participation and Outcomes Among English-Speaking and Spanish-Speaking Patients With Appendicitis Randomized to Antibiotics: A Secondary Analysis of the CODA Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Spanish-speaking participants are underrepresented in clinical trials, limiting study generalizability and contributing to ongoing health inequity. The Comparison of Outcomes of Antibiotic Drugs and Appendectomy (CODA) trial intentionally included Spanish-speaking participants. Objective: To describe trial participation and compare clinical and patient-reported outcomes among Spanish-speaking and English-speaking participants with acute appendicitis randomized to antibiotics. Design, Setting, and Participants: This study is a secondary analysis of the CODA trial, a pragmatic randomized trial comparing antibiotic therapy with appendectomy in adult patients with imaging-confirmed appendicitis enrolled at 25 centers across the US from May 1, 2016, to February 28, 2020. The trial was conducted in English and Spanish. All 776 participants randomized to antibiotics are included in this analysis. The data were analyzed from November 15, 2021, through August 24, 2022. Intervention: Randomization to a 10-day course of antibiotics or appendectomy. Main Outcomes and Measures: Trial participation, European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) questionnaire scores (higher scores indicating a better health status), rate of appendectomy, treatment satisfaction, decisional regret, and days of work missed. Outcomes are also reported for a subset of participants that were recruited from the 5 sites with a large proportion of Spanish-speaking participants. Results: Among eligible patients 476 of 1050 Spanish speakers (45%) and 1076 of 3982 of English speakers (27%) consented, comprising the 1552 participants who underwent 1:1 randomization (mean age, 38.0 years; 976 male [63%]). Of the 776 participants randomized to antibiotics, 238 were Spanish speaking (31%). Among Spanish speakers randomized to antibiotics, the rate of appendectomy was 22% (95% CI, 17%-28%) at 30 days and 45% (95% CI, 38%-52%) at 1 year, while in English speakers, these rates were 20% (95% CI, 16%-23%) at 30 days and 42% (95% CI 38%-47%) at 1 year. Mean EQ-5D scores were 0.93 (95% CI, 0.92-0.95) among Spanish speakers and 0.92 (95% CI, 0.91-0.93) among English speakers. Symptom resolution at 30 days was reported by 68% (95% CI, 61%-74%) of Spanish speakers and 69% (95% CI, 64%-73%) of English speakers. Spanish speakers missed 6.69 (95% CI, 5.51-7.87) days of work on average, while English speakers missed 3.76 (95% CI, 3.20-4.32) days. Presentation to the emergency department or urgent care, hospitalization, treatment dissatisfaction, and decisional regret were low for both groups. Conclusions and Relevance: A high proportion of Spanish speakers participated in the CODA trial. Clinical and most patient-reported outcomes were similar for English- and Spanish-speaking participants treated with antibiotics. Spanish speakers reported more days of missed work. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02800785.

Active surveillance cultures of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus as a tool to predict methicillin-resistant S. aureus ventilator-associated pneumonia.

OBJECTIVE: Ventilator-associated pneumonia is one of the most common infections in the intensive care unit and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus has emerged as a common cause of ventilator-associated pneumonia. We sought to study the performance characteristics of once weekly active surveillance culture of methicillin-resistant S. aureus colonization in predicting the development of methicillin-resistant S. aureus ventilator-associated pneumonia. DESIGN: Prospective observational study. SETTING: Eighty-nine-bed surgical and medical intensive care units in a university-affiliated urban teaching hospital and level I trauma and burn center. PATIENTS: All patients≥16 yrs old admitted to the intensive care unit on mechanical ventilation≥48 hrs who met diagnostic criteria for ventilator-associated pneumonia by quantitative lower respiratory tract cultures obtained through bronchoscopic alveolar lavage or brush specimen between January 2008 and October 2010 were included. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Nine hundred twenty-four episodes of suspected ventilator-associated pneumonia were evaluated, and 388 patients with bronchoalveolar lavage-confirmed ventilator-associated pneumonia were included. Surveillance cultures were taken from the nares, oropharynx or trachea, and any open wound routinely on admission to the intensive care unit, every 7 days afterward, and at intensive care unit discharge. Of the 388 patients, 37 (9.5%) had methicillin-resistant S. aureus ventilator-associated pneumonia and 54 (13.9%) had methicillin-resistant S. aureus colonization documented by active surveillance culture before the development of ventilator-associated pneumonia. The sensitivity and specificity of prior methicillin-resistant S. aureus colonization as a predictor for methicillin-resistant S. aureus ventilator-associated pneumonia are 70.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] 52.8-83.6) and 92.0% (95% CI 88.5-94.5), respectively. The positive and negative predictive values are 48.1% (95% CI 34.5- 62.0) and 96.7% (95% CI 94.0-98.3). CONCLUSIONS: In our study, prior methicillin-resistant S. aureus colonization as ascertained by once-weekly active surveillance culture yielded high specificity and negative predictive value, suggesting that negative active surveillance culture can accurately exclude methicillin-resistant S. aureus as an etiology in most patients with ventilator-associated pneumonia and may decrease the need for empirical methicillin-resistant S. aureus coverage in patients with suspected ventilator-associated pneumonia.

Infection control for critically ill trauma patients: a systematic approach to prevention, detection, and provider feedback.

Critically ill patients are particularly at risk for developing hospital-acquired infections. An understanding of the predisposing factors, the epidemiology of disease, and guidelines to treat and to prevent hospital-acquired infections is necessary to incorporate infection control into the daily care of the critically ill trauma patient. Although it remains a challenge, infection control programs have moved from providing surveillance data and guidelines recommendations to implementation and engagement programs aimed at a shared responsibility for hospital-acquired infections prevention. We describe a multidisciplinary approach to infection control in the critically ill trauma patient with a special focus on ventilator-associated pneumonia at a level 1 trauma and burn center.

Patient and Provider Preferences for Monitoring Surgical Wounds Using an mHealth App: A Formative Qualitative Analysis.

Background: Surgical site infections complicate approximately 10% of all inpatient operations and account for nearly 20% of surgical re-admissions. Post-operative hospitalizations have become shorter over time, yet limited resources exist for patients to use at their home to communicate surgical wound problems with their medical providers. This study evaluated the attitudes of patients and providers towards using a remote wound monitoring application. Methods: This formative descriptive qualitative study reports the result of analysis of the interview content of five patients and five providers from a colorectal surgery clinic at the Medical University of South Carolina in Charleston, South Carolina. Semi-structured, face-to-face interviews were conducted in the clinic setting, were recorded, and professionally transcribed. Two of the authors independently reviewed and coded the transcribed interviews to identify themes across all 10 interviews. After independent coding, authors reviewed findings to reconcile and streamline the primary themes representing attitudes of patients and providers toward remote wound monitoring. Results: Five primary codes were found across our interviews: current barriers, infection types, workflow, interest in surgical site infection (SSI) monitoring, application considerations, and requested application features. We subcoded "symptom clarification" and "positive anticipation" under "interest in SSI monitoring," as well as "anticipated issues" and "application features" under "application considerations." From these codes, we synthesized findings into three overarching themes: smartphone app for remote wound monitoring has potential to improve patient-provider communication, specific wound evaluation processes are acceptable to patients and providers, and new collaboration with telehealth service is a welcome addition for interdisciplinary team management. Conclusions: A prospective approach to the development of a remote wound monitoring application enables a user-centric development process. Our analysis shows a readiness from both patients and providers to implement remote wound monitoring for identifying potential SSIs and coordinating surgical wound care within the community.

Surgical Infection Society Guidelines: 2022 Updated Guidelines for Antibiotic Use in Open Extremity Fractures.

Background: Open fractures, defined as fractures communicating with the environment through a skin wound, cause substantial morbidity after traumatic injury. Current evidence supports administration of prophylactic systemic antibiotic agents to patients with open extremity fractures to decrease infectious complications. Methods: The Therapeutic and Guidelines Committee of The Surgical Infection Society convened to revise guidelines for antibiotic use in open fractures. PubMed was queried for pertinent studies. Evaluation of the published evidence was performed using the GRADE framework. All committee members voted to accept or reject each recommendation. Results: In type I or II open extremity fractures, we recommend against administration of extended-spectrum antibiotic coverage compared with gram-positive coverage alone to decrease infections complications, hospital length of stay or mortality. In type III open extremity fractures, we recommend antibiotic therapy for no more than 24 hrs after injury, in the absence of clinical signs of active infection, to decrease infectious complications, hospital length of stay or mortality, and we recommend against extended antimicrobial coverage beyond gram-positive organisms to decrease infectious complications, hospital length of stay or mortality. In type III open extremity fractures with associated bone loss, we recommend antibiotic therapy in addition to systemic therapy to decrease infectious complications. Conclusions: Although antibiotic agents remain a standard of care for infection prevention after open extremity fractures, our findings and surveys of clinical practice patterns clearly show that additional robust clinical trials are needed to provide stronger corroborating evidence.

Analysis of Outcomes Associated With Outpatient Management of Nonoperatively Treated Patients With Appendicitis.

Importance: In the Comparison of Outcomes of Antibiotic Drugs and Appendectomy (CODA) trial, which found antibiotics to be noninferior, approximately half of participants randomized to receive antibiotics had outpatient management with hospital discharge within 24 hours. If outpatient management is safe, it could increase convenience and decrease health care use and costs. Objective: To assess the use and safety of outpatient management of acute appendicitis. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study, which is a secondary analysis of the CODA trial, included 776 adults with imaging-confirmed appendicitis who received antibiotics at 25 US hospitals from May 1, 2016, to February 28, 2020. Exposures: Participants randomized to antibiotics (intravenous then oral) could be discharged from the emergency department based on clinician judgment and prespecified criteria (hemodynamically stable, afebrile, oral intake tolerated, pain controlled, and follow-up confirmed). Outpatient management and hospitalization were defined as discharge within or after 24 hours, respectively. Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcomes compared among patients receiving outpatient vs inpatient care included serious adverse events (SAEs), appendectomies, health care encounters, satisfaction, missed workdays at 7 days, and EuroQol 5-dimension (EQ-5D) score at 30 days. In addition, appendectomy incidence among outpatients and inpatients, unadjusted and adjusted for illness severity, was compared. Results: Among 776 antibiotic-randomized participants, 42 (5.4%) underwent appendectomy within 24 hours and 8 (1.0%) did not receive their first antibiotic dose within 24 hours, leaving 726 (93.6%) comprising the study population (median age, 36 years; range, 18-86 years; 462 [63.6%] male; 437 [60.2%] White). Of these participants, 335 (46.1%; site range, 0-89.2%) were discharged within 24 hours, and 391 (53.9%) were discharged after 24 hours. Over 7 days, SAEs occurred in 0.9 (95% CI, 0.2-2.6) per 100 outpatients and 1.3 (95% CI, 0.4-2.9) per 100 inpatients; in the appendicolith subgroup, SAEs occurred in 2.3 (95% CI, 0.3-8.2) per 100 outpatients vs 2.8 (95% CI, 0.6-7.9) per 100 inpatients. During this period, appendectomy occurred in 9.9% (95% CI, 6.9%-13.7%) of outpatients and 14.1% (95% CI, 10.8%-18.0%) of inpatients; adjusted analysis demonstrated a similar difference in incidence (-4.0 percentage points; 95% CI, -8.7 to 0.6). At 30 days, appendectomies occurred in 12.6% (95% CI, 9.1%-16.7%) of outpatients and 19.0% (95% CI, 15.1%-23.4%) of inpatients. Outpatients missed fewer workdays (2.6 days; 95% CI, 2.3-2.9 days) than did inpatients (3.8 days; 95% CI, 3.4-4.3 days) and had similar frequency of return health care visits and high satisfaction and EQ-5D scores. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings support that outpatient antibiotic management is safe for selected adults with acute appendicitis, with no greater risk of complications or appendectomy than hospital care, and should be included in shared decision-making discussions of patient preferences for outcomes associated with nonoperative and operative care. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02800785.