Book chapters will be unavailable on Saturday 24th August between 8am-12pm BST. This is for essential maintenance which will provide improved performance going forwards. Please accept our apologies for any inconvenience caused.
To send content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about sending content to .
To send content items to your Kindle, first ensure firstname.lastname@example.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about sending to your Kindle.
Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Surgical site infections (SSIs) are a leading cause of morbidity and mortality among women undergoing cesarean section (C-section), a common procedure in North America. While risk factors for SSI are often modifiable, wide variation in clinical practice exists. With this review, we provide a comprehensive overview of the results and quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses on interventions to reduce surgical site infections among women undergoing C-section.
We searched PubMed and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for systematic reviews and meta-analyses published between January 2000 and May 2014 on interventions to reduce the occurrence of SSIs (incisional infections and endometritis), among women undergoing C-section. We extracted data on the interventions, outcomes, and strength of evidence as determined by the original article authors, and assessed the quality of each article based on a modified Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews tool.
A total of 30 review articles met inclusion criteria and were reviewed. Among these articles, 77 distinct interventions were evaluated: 29% were supported with strong evidence as assessed by the original article authors, and 83% of the reviews articles were classified as good quality based on our assessment. Ten interventions were classified as being effective in reducing SSI with strong evidence in a good-quality article, including preoperative vaginal cleansing, the use of perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis, and several surgical techniques.
Efforts to reduce SSI rates among women undergoing C-section should include interventions such as preoperative vaginal cleansing and the use of perioperative antibiotics because compelling evidence exists to support their effectiveness.
To evaluate the adequacy of discharge room cleaning and the impact of a cleaning intervention on the presence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) on environmental surfaces in intensive care unit (ICU) rooms.
Prospective environmental study.
Setting and sample.
Convenience sample of ICU rooms in an academic hospital.
Methods and intervention.
The intervention consisted of (1) a change from the use of pour bottles to bucket immersion for applying disinfectant to cleaning cloths, (2) an educational campaign, and (3) feedback regarding adequacy of discharge cleaning. Cleaning of 15 surfaces was evaluated by inspecting for removal of a preapplied mark, visible only with an ultraviolet lamp (“black light”). Six surfaces were cultured for MRSA or VRE contamination. Outcomes of mark removal and culture positivity were evaluated by X2 testing and generalized linear mixed models, clustering by room.
The black-light mark was removed from 44% of surfaces at baseline, compared with 71 % during the intervention (P < .001). The intervention increased the likelihood of removal of black-light marks after discharge cleaning (odds ratio, 4.4; P < .001), controlling for ICU type (medical vs surgical) and type of surface. The intervention reduced the likelihood of an environmental culture positive for MRSA or VRE (proportion of cultures positive, 45% at baseline vs 27% during the intervention; adjusted odds ratio, 0.4; P = .02). Broad, flat surfaces were more likely to be cleaned than were doorknobs and sink or toilet handles.
Increasing the volume of disinfectant applied to environmental surfaces, providing education for Environmental Services staff, and instituting feedback with a black-light marker improved cleaning and reduced the frequency of MRSA and VRE contamination.
Recently, mass-casualty incident (MCI) preparedness and training has received increasing attention at the hospital level.
To review the existing evidence on the effectiveness of disaster drills, technology-based interventions and tabletop exercises in training hospital staff to respond to an MCI.
A systematic, evidence-based process was conducted incorporating expert panel input and a literature review with the key terms: “mass casualty”, “disaster”, “disaster planning”, and “drill”. Paired investigators reviewed citation abstracts to identify articles that included evaluation of disaster training for hospital staff. Data were abstracted from the studies (e.g., MCI type, training intervention, staff targeted, objectives, evaluation methods, and results). Study quality was reviewed using standardized criteria.
Of 243 potentially relevant citations, twenty-one met the defined criteria. Studies varied in terms of targeted staff, learning objectives, outcomes, and evaluation methods. Most were characterized by significant limitations in design and evaluation methods. Seventeen addressed the effectiveness of disaster drills in training hospital staff in responding to an MCI, four addressed technology-based interventions, and none addressed tabletop exercises. The existing evidence suggests that hospital disaster drills are effective in allowing hospital employees to become familiar with disaster procedures, identify problems in different components of response (e.g., incident command, communications, triage, patient flow, materials and resources, and security) and provide the opportunity to apply lessons learned to disaster response. The strength of evidence on other training methods is insufficient to draw valid recommendations.
Current evidence on the effectiveness of MCI training for hospital staff is limited. A number of studies suggest that disaster drills can be effective in training hospital staff. However, more attention should be directed to evaluating the effectiveness of disaster training activities in a scientifically rigorous manner.
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.