Operating room air delivery design to protect patient and surgical site results in particles released at surgical table having greater concentration along walls of the room than at the instrument tray

ASRA Pain Medicine consensus practice infection control guidelines for regional anesthesia and pain medicine

BACKGROUND

To provide recommendations on risk mitigation, diagnosis and treatment of infectious complications associated with the practice of regional anesthesia, acute and chronic pain management.

METHODS

Following board approval, in 2020 the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine (ASRA Pain Medicine) commissioned evidence-based guidelines for best practices for infection control. More than 80 research questions were developed and literature searches undertaken by assigned working groups comprising four to five members. Modified US Preventive Services Task Force criteria were used to determine levels of evidence and certainty. Using a modified Delphi method, >50% agreement was needed to accept a recommendation for author review, and >75% agreement for a recommendation to be accepted. The ASRA Pain Medicine Board of Directors reviewed and approved the final guidelines.

RESULTS

After documenting the incidence and infectious complications associated with regional anesthesia and interventional pain procedures including implanted devices, we made recommendations regarding the role of the anesthesiologist and pain physician in infection control, preoperative patient risk factors and management, sterile technique, equipment use and maintenance, healthcare setting (office, hospital, operating room), surgical technique, postoperative risk reduction, and infection symptoms, diagnosis, and treatment. Consensus recommendations were based on risks associated with different settings and procedures, and keeping in mind each patient's unique characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

The recommendations are intended to be multidisciplinary guidelines for clinical care and clinical decision-making in the regional anesthesia and chronic interventional pain practice. The issues addressed are constantly evolving, therefore, consistent updating will be required.

Infection Prevention and the Protective Effects of Unidirectional Displacement Flow Ventilation in the Turbulent Spaces of the Operating Room

BACKGROUND

Unidirectional displacement flow (UDF) ventilation systems in operating rooms are characterized by a uniformity of velocity ≥80% and protect patients and operating room personnel against exposure to hazardous substances. However, the air below the surgical lights and in the surrounding zone is turbulent, which impairs the ventilation system's effect.

AIM

We first used the recovery time (RT) as specified in International Organization for Standardization 14644 to determine the particle reduction capacity in the turbulent spaces of an operating room with a UDF system.

METHODS

The uniformity of velocity was analyzed by comfort-level probe grid measurements in the protected area below a hemispherical closed-shaped and a semi-open column-shaped surgical light (tilt angles: 0°/15°/30°) and in the surrounding zone of a research operating room. Thereafter, RTs were calculated.

RESULTS

At a supply air volume of 10,500 m3/h, the velocity, reported as average uniformity ± standard deviation, was uniform in the protected area without lights (95.8% ± 1.7%), but locally turbulent below the hemispherical closed-shaped (69.3% ± 14.6%), the semi-open column-shaped light (66.9% ± 10.9%), and in the surrounding zone (51.5% ± 17.6%). The RTs ranged between 1.1 and 1.7 min below the lights and 3.5 ± 0.28 min in the surrounding zone and depended exponentially on the volume flow rate.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to an RT of ≤20 min as required for operating rooms with mixed dilution flow, particles here were eliminated 12-18 times more quickly from below the surgical lights and 5.7 times from the surrounding zone. Thus, the effect of the lights was negligible and the UDF's retained its strong protective effect.

Guidelines for improvement of the procedural aspects of devices and surgical instruments in the operating theatre

Surgical site infections are a major complication for patients undergoing surgical treatment and a significant cause of mortality and morbidity. Many international guidelines suggest measures for the prevention of surgical site infections (SSI) in perioperative processes and the decontamination of surgical devices and instruments. This document proposes guidelines for improving the perioperative setting in view of the devices and instrumentation required for surgical procedures, aiming to reduce contamination rates and improve clinical performance and management for patients undergoing surgical treatment. This document is intended for doctors, nurses and other practitioners involved in operating theatre procedures, resource management and clinical risk assessment processes, and the procurement, organisation, sterilisation and reprocessing of surgical instruments.

Quantifying and Interpreting Inequality in Surgical Site Infections per Quarter Among Anesthetizing Locations and Specialties

Background Earlier studies have shown that prevention of surgical site infection can achieve net cost savings when targeted to operating rooms with the most surgical site infections. Methodology This retrospective cohort study included all 231,057 anesthetics between May 2017 and June 2022 at a large teaching hospital. The anesthetics were administered in operating rooms, procedure rooms, radiology, and other sites. The 8,941 postoperative infections were identified from International Classification of Diseases diagnosis codes relevant to surgical site infections documented during all follow-up encounters over 90 days postoperatively. To quantify the inequality in the counts of infections among anesthetizing locations, the Gini index was used, with the Gini index being proportional to the sum of the absolute pairwise differences among anesthetizing locations in the counts of infections. Results The Gini index for infections among the 112 anesthetizing locations at the hospital was 0.64 (99% confidence interval = 0.56 to 0.71). The value of 0.64 is so large that, for comparison, it exceeds nearly all countries' Gini index for income inequality. The 50% of locations with the fewest infections accounted for 5% of infections. The 10% of locations with the most infections accounted for 40% of infections and 15% of anesthetics. Among the 57 operating room locations, there was no association between counts of cases and infections (Spearman correlation coefficient r = 0.01). Among the non-operating room locations (e.g., interventional radiology), there was a significant association (Spearman r = 0.79). Conclusions Targeting specific anesthetizing locations is important for the multiple interventions to reduce surgical site infections that represent fixed costs irrespective of the number of patients (e.g., specialized ventilatory systems and nightly ultraviolet-C disinfection).

Optimisation of perioperative procedural factors to reduce the risk of surgical site infection in patients undergoing surgery: a systematic review

Surgical site infections (SSI) are the leading cause of hospital readmission after surgical procedures with significant impact on post-operative morbidity and mortality. Modifiable risk factors for SSI include procedural aspects, which include the possibility of instrument contamination, the duration of the operation, the number of people present and the traffic in the room and the ventilation system of the operating theatre.The aim of this systematic review was to provide literature evidence on the relationship between features of surgical procedure sets and the frequency of SSI in patients undergoing surgical treatment, and to analyse how time frames of perioperative processes and operating theatre traffic vary in relation to the features of the procedure sets use, in order tooptimise infection control in OT. The results of the systematic review brought to light observational studies that can be divided into two categories: evidence of purely clinical significance and evidence of mainly organisational, managerial and financial significance. These two systems are largely interconnected, and reciprocally influence each other. The decision to use disposable devices and instruments has been accompanied by a lower incidence in surgical site infections and surgical revisions for remediation. A concomitant reduction in post-operative functional recovery time has also been observed. Also, the rationalisation of traditional surgical sets has also been observed in conjunction with outcomes of clinical significance.

Effects of medical staff's turning movement on dispersion of airborne particles under large air supply diffuser during operative surgeries

The present study examines the effect of medical staff's turning movements on particle concentration in the surgical zone and settlement on the patient under single large diffuser (SLD) ventilation. A computational domain representing the operating room (OR) was constructed using computer-aided design (CAD) software. The airflow and particle models were validated against the published data before conducting the case studies. The airflow in the OR was simulated using an RNG k-ε turbulence model, while the dispersion of the particles was simulated using a discrete phase model based on the Lagrangian approach. A user-defined function (UDF) code was written and compiled in the simulation software to describe the medical staff member's turning movements. In this study, three cases were examined: baseline, SLD 1, and SLD 2, with the air supply areas of 4.3 m², 5.7 m², and 15.9 m², respectively. Results show that SLD ventilations in an OR can reduce the number of dispersed particles in the surgical zone. The particles that settled on the patient were reduced by 41% and 39% when using the SLD 1 and SLD 2 ventilations, respectively. The use of the larger air supply area of SLD 2 ventilation in the present study does not significantly reduce the particles that settle on a patient. Likewise, the use of SLD 2 ventilation may increase operating and maintenance costs.

Inanimate surface contamination of SARS-CoV-2 during midfacial fracture repair in asymptomatic COVID-19 patients

Purposes

To evaluate inanimate surface contamination of SARS-CoV-2 during midfacial fracture repair (MFR) and to identify relevant aggregating factors.

Methods

Using a prospective non-randomised comparative study design, we enrolled a cohort of asymptomatic COVID-19 patients undergoing MFR. The predictor variables were osteofixation system (conventional titanium plates [CTiP] vs. ultrasound-assisted resorbable plates [USaRP]). The main outcomes were the presence of SARS-CoV-2 on four different surfaces. Other study variables were categorised into demographic, anatomical, and operative. Descriptive, bi- and multivariate statistics were computed.

Results

The sample consisted of 11 patients (27.3% females, 63.6% right side, 72.7% displaced fractures) with a mean age of 52.7 ± 20.1 years (range, 19–85). Viral spread was, on average, 1.9 ± 0.4 m. from the operative field, including most oral and orbital retractors’ tips (81.8% and 72.7%) and no virus was found at 3 m from the operative field, but no significant difference was found between 2 osteofixation types. On binary adjustments, significantly broader contamination was linked to centrolateral MFR (P = 0.034; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.05 to 1.02), and displaced MFR > 45 min (P = 0.022; 95% CI, 0.1 to 1.03).

Conclusions

USaRP, albeit presumably heavily aerosol-producing, cause similar SARS-CoV-2 distribution to CTiP. Non-surgical operating room (OR) staff should stay ≥ 3 m from the operative field, if the patient is SARS-CoV-2-positive. Enoral and orbital instruments are a potential virus source, especially during displaced MFR > 45 min and/or centrolateral MFR, emphasising an importance of appropriate patient screening and OR organisation.

Quantifying and interpreting inequality of surgical site infections among operating rooms

PURPOSE

The incidence of surgical site infection differs among operating rooms (ORs). However, cost effectiveness of interventions targeting ORs depends on infection counts. The purpose of this study was to quantify the inequality of infection counts among ORs.

METHODS

We performed a single-centre historical cohort study of elective surgical cases spanning a 160-week period from May 2017 to May 2020, identifying cases of infection within 90 days using International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification diagnosis codes. We used the Gini index to measure inequality of infections among ORs. As a reference, the Gini index for inequality of household disposable income in the US in 2017 was 0.39, and 0.31 for Canada.

RESULTS

There were 3,148 (3.67%) infections among the 85,744 cases studied. The 20% of 57 ORs with the most and least infections accounted for 44% (99% confidence interval [CI], 36 to 52) and 5% (99% CI, 2 to 8), respectively. The Gini index was 0.40 (99% CI, 0.31 to 0.50), which is comparable to income inequality in the US. There were more infections in ORs with more minutes of cases (Spearman correlation ρ = 0.68; P < 0.001), but generally not in ORs with more total cases (ρ = 0.11; P = 0.43). Moderately long (3.3 to 4.8 hr) cases had a large effect, having greater incidences of infection, while not being so long as to have just one case per day per OR. There was substantially greater inequality in infection counts among the 557 observed combinations of OR specialty (Gini index 0.85; 99% CI, 0.81 to 0.88).

CONCLUSIONS

Inequality of infections among ORs is substantial and caused by both inequality in the incidence of infections and inequality in the total minutes of cases. Inequality in infections among OR and specialty combinations is due principally to inequality in total minutes of cases.