Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c47g7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T18:37:55.941Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Surveillance for Postoperative Infections in Outpatient Gynecologic Surgery

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

James M. Garvey ,
Carol Buffenmyer ,
Russel Rule Rycheck ,
Robert Yee ,
Joanne McVay  and
James H. Harger
James M. Garvey
Affiliation:
Department of Epidemiology, Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Carol Buffenmyer
Affiliation:
Infection Control Committee, Magee-Women's Hospital, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Russel Rule Rycheck
Affiliation:
Department of Epidemiology, Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Robert Yee
Affiliation:
Department of Infectious Diseases and Microbiology, Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Joanne McVay
Affiliation:
Department of Epidemiology, Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
James H. Harger*
Affiliation:
Infection Control Committee, Magee-Women's Hospital, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
*
Magee-Women's Hospital, Forbes and Halket Street, Pittsburgh, PA 15213
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Postoperative infection rates were determined for gynecologic outpatient surgical procedures performed in a traditional operating room environment and a separate, recently opened, surgicenter within the same hospital. Infections were self-reported by attending surgeons responding to computer-generated line listings of their recent surgical procedures. Responses were obtained on 97.9% (612/625) of women having surgery in the operating room and 99.5% (629/632) of women with surgicenter procedures. The overall infection rate for reported women was 0.9% (11/1,241). The difference between operating room and surgicenter rates was not statistically significant. Postoperative infections occurred in 2.5% (3/118) of diagnostic laparoscopies with tubal lavage and 1.4% (3/214) of voluntary abortions by dilatation and evacuation and curettage (D&E&C). The five other infections were scattered among the remaining 25 procedure categories. Ten of the 11 infections were limited to the “clean-contaminated” wounds. No serious or life-threatening infections were encountered. The computer-assisted surveillance system worked well and was easily incorporated into the existing infection surveillance system. The degree of ascertainment of postoperative wound infections is unknown due to reliance on physician self-reporting. However, no patients requiring readmission for infection went unreported by the attending surgeons.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 7 , Issue 2 , February 1986 , pp. 54 - 58
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 1986

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Cruse, P, Wound infection surveillance. Rev Infect Dis 1982;3:734–737.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Goulbourne, IA, Ruckley, CV, Operations for hernia and varicose veins in a day-bed unit. Br Med J 1979;2:712–714.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Phillips, JM, Hulka, B, Hulka, J, et al: Laparoscopic procedures: The American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists Membership Survey for 1975. J Reprod Med 1977;18:227–232.Google Scholar
4.DeStefano, F, Greenspan, JR. Dicker, RC, et al: Complications of interval tubal sterilization. Obstet Gynecol 1983;61:153–158.Google Scholar
5.Huezo, CM, DeStefano, F, Rubin, GL, et al: Risk of wound and pelvic infection after laparoscopic tubal sterilization: Instrument disinfection versus sterilization. Obstet Gynecol 1983;61:598–602.Google ScholarPubMed
6.Natof, HE, Complications associated with ambulatory surgery. JAMA 1983;244:1116–1118.Google Scholar
7.Craig, CP, Infection surveillance for ambulatory surgery patients. An overview. QRB 1983; April: 107–111.Google Scholar
8.Cunahan, RG, Courey, NG, Lippes, J, Complications of laparoscopic tubal sterilization. Obstet Gynecol 1980;55:501–506.Google Scholar
9.Wolff, J, Dunnihoo, DR, A freestanding ambulatory surgical unit: A success or failure? Am J Obstet Gynecol 1982;143:270–276.Google Scholar
10.Sonne-Holm, S, Heisterberg, L, Hebjorn, S, et al: Prophylactic antibiotics in first-trimester abortions: A clinical, controlled trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1981;139:693–696.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11.Hodgson, JE, Major, B, Portmann, K, et al: Prophylactic use of tetracycline for first trimester abortions. Obstet Gynecol 1975;45:574–578.Google Scholar
12.Moberg, P, Sjoberg, B, Wiquist, N, The hazards of vacuum aspiration in late first trimester abortions. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1975;54:113–118.Google Scholar
13.Nathanson, BN, Ambulatory abortions: Experience with 26,000 cases. N Engl J Med 1972;286:403–407.Google Scholar