Surgical site infection prevention following total hip arthroplasty in Australia : a cost-effectiveness analysis

Background: Surgical site infection (SSI) is associated with substantial costs for health services, reduced quality of life, and functional outcomes. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of strategies claiming to reduce the risk of SSI in hip arthroplasty in Australia. Methods: Baseline use of antibiotic prophylaxis (AP) was compared with no antibiotic prophylaxis (no AP), antibiotic-impregnated cement (AP þ ABC), and laminar air operating rooms (AP þ LOR). A Markov model was used to simulate long-term health and cost outcomes of a hypothetical cohort of 30,000 total hip arthroplasty patients from a health services perspective. Model parameters were informed by the best available evidence. Uncertainty was explored in probabilistic sensitivity and scenario analyses. Results: Stopping the routine use of AP resulted in over Australian dollars (AUD) $1.5 million extra costs and a loss of 163 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Using antibiotic cement in addition to AP (AP þ ABC)generated an extra 32 QALYs while saving over AUD $123,000. The use of laminar air operating rooms combined with routine AP (AP þ LOR) resulted in an AUD $4.59 million cost increase and 127 QALYs lost compared with the baseline comparator. Conclusion: Preventing deep SSI with antibiotic prophylaxis and antibiotic-impregnated cement has shown to improve health outcomes among hospitalized patients, save lives, and enhance resource allocation. Based on this evidence, the use of laminar air operating rooms is not recommended.

Most relevant strategies for preventing surgical site infection after total hip arthroplasty : guideline recommendations and expert opinion

BACKGROUND: Numerous strategies are available to prevent surgical site infections in hip arthroplasty, but there is no consensus on which might be the best. This study examined infection prevention strategies currently recommended for patients undergoing hip arthroplasty. METHODS: Four clinical guidelines on infection prevention/orthopedics were reviewed. Infection control practitioners, infectious disease physicians, and orthopedic surgeons were consulted through structured interviews and an online survey. Strategies were classified as "highly important" if they were recommended by at least one guideline and ranked as significantly or critically important by >/=75% of the experts. RESULTS: The guideline review yielded 28 infection prevention measures, with 7 identified by experts as being highly important in this context: antibiotic prophylaxis, antiseptic skin preparation of patients, hand/forearm antisepsis by surgical staff, sterile gowns/surgical attire, ultraclean/laminar air operating theatres, antibiotic-impregnated cement, and surveillance. Controversial measures included antibiotic-impregnated cement and, considering recent literature, laminar air operating theatres. CONCLUSIONS: Some of these measures may already be accepted as routine clinical practice, whereas others are controversial. Whether these practices should be continued for this patient group will be informed by modeling the cost-effectiveness of infection prevention strategies. This will allow predictions of long-term health and cost outcomes and thus inform decisions on how to best use scarce health care resources for infection control.

Prevention of surgical site infection in total joint arthroplasty : an international tertiary care center survery

Background Prevention strategies are critical to reduce infection rates in total joint arthroplasty (TJA), but evidence-based consensus guidelines on prevention of surgical site infection (SSI) remain heterogeneous and do not necessarily represent this particular patient population. Questions/Purposes What infection prevention measures are recommended by consensus evidence-based guidelines for prevention of periprosthetic joint infection? How do these recommendations compare to expert consensus on infection prevention strategies from orthopedic surgeons from the largest international tertiary referral centers for TJA? Patients and Methods A review of consensus guidelines was undertaken as described by Merollini et al. Four clinical guidelines met inclusion criteria: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's, British Orthopedic Association, National Institute of Clinical Excellence's, and National Health and Medical Research Council's (NHMRC). Twenty-eight recommendations from these guidelines were used to create an evidence-based survey of infection prevention strategies that was administered to 28 orthopedic surgeons from members of the International Society of Orthopedic Centers. The results between existing consensus guidelines and expert opinion were then compared. Results Recommended strategies in the guidelines such as prophylactic antibiotics, preoperative skin preparation of patients and staff, and sterile surgical attire were considered critically or significantly important by the surveyed surgeons. Additional strategies such as ultraclean air/laminar flow, antibiotic cement, wound irrigation, and preoperative blood glucose control were also considered highly important by surveyed surgeons, but were not recommended or not uniformly addressed in existing guidelines on SSI prevention. Conclusion Current evidence-based guidelines are incomplete and evidence should be updated specifically to address patient needs undergoing TJA.

Preoperative bathing or showering with skin antiseptics to prevent surgical site infection

Background Surgical site infections (SSIs) are wound infections that occur after invasive (surgical) procedures. Preoperative bathing or showering with an antiseptic skin wash product is a well-accepted procedure for reducing skin bacteria (microflora). It is less clear whether reducing skin microflora leads to a lower incidence of surgical site infection. Objectives To review the evidence for preoperative bathing or showering with antiseptics for preventing hospital-acquired (nosocomial) surgical site infections. Search methods For this fifth update we searched the Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register (searched 18 December 2014); the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2014 Issue 11); Ovid MEDLINE (2012 to December Week 4 2014), Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations December 18, 2014); Ovid EMBASE (2012 to 2014 Week 51), EBSCO CINAHL (2012 to December 18 2014) and reference lists of articles. Selection criteria Randomised controlled trials comparing any antiseptic preparation used for preoperative full-body bathing or showering with non-antiseptic preparations in people undergoing surgery. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently assessed studies for selection, risk of bias and extracted data. Study authors were contacted for additional information. Main results We did not identify any new trials for inclusion in this fifth update. Seven trials involving a total of 10,157 participants were included. Four of the included trials had three comparison groups. The antiseptic used in all trials was 4% chlorhexidine gluconate (Hibiscrub/Riohex). Three trials involving 7791 participants compared chlorhexidine with a placebo. Bathing with chlorhexidine compared with placebo did not result in a statistically significant reduction in SSIs; the relative risk of SSI (RR) was 0.91 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.80 to 1.04). When only trials of high quality were included in this comparison, the RR of SSI was 0.95 (95%CI 0.82 to 1.10). Three trials of 1443 participants compared bar soap with chlorhexidine; when combined there was no difference in the risk of SSIs (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.84). Three trials of 1192 patients compared bathing with chlorhexidine with no washing, one large study found a statistically significant difference in favour of bathing with chlorhexidine (RR 0.36, 95%CI 0.17 to 0.79). The smaller studies found no difference between patients who washed with chlorhexidine and those who did not wash preoperatively. Authors' conclusions This review provides no clear evidence of benefit for preoperative showering or bathing with chlorhexidine over other wash products, to reduce surgical site infection. Efforts to reduce the incidence of nosocomial surgical site infection should focus on interventions where effect has been demonstrated.

Evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of strategies claiming to reduce the risk of surgical site infections following primary total hip arthroplasty

Background Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a commonly performed procedure and numbers are increasing with ageing populations. One of the most serious complications in THA are surgical site infections (SSIs), caused by pathogens entering the wound during the procedure. SSIs are associated with a substantial burden for health services, increased mortality and reduced functional outcomes in patients. Numerous approaches to preventing these infections exist but there is no gold standard in practice and the cost-effectiveness of alternate strategies is largely unknown. Objectives The aim of this project was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of strategies claiming to reduce deep surgical site infections following total hip arthroplasty in Australia. The objectives were: 1. Identification of competing strategies or combinations of strategies that are clinically relevant to the control of SSI related to hip arthroplasty 2. Evidence synthesis and pooling of results to assess the volume and quality of evidence claiming to reduce the risk of SSI following total hip arthroplasty 3. Construction of an economic decision model incorporating cost and health outcomes for each of the identified strategies 4. Quantification of the effect of uncertainty in the model 5. Assessment of the value of perfect information among model parameters to inform future data collection Methods The literature relating to SSI in THA was reviewed, in particular to establish definitions of these concepts, understand mechanisms of aetiology and microbiology, risk factors, diagnosis and consequences as well as to give an overview of existing infection prevention measures. Published economic evaluations on this topic were also reviewed and limitations for Australian decision-makers identified. A Markov state-transition model was developed for the Australian context and subsequently validated by clinicians. The model was designed to capture key events related to deep SSI occurring within the first 12 months following primary THA. Relevant infection prevention measures were selected by reviewing clinical guideline recommendations combined with expert elicitation. Strategies selected for evaluation were the routine use of pre-operative antibiotic prophylaxis (AP) versus no use of antibiotic prophylaxis (No AP) or in combination with antibiotic-impregnated cement (AP & ABC) or laminar air operating rooms (AP & LOR). The best available evidence for clinical effect size and utility parameters was harvested from the medical literature using reproducible methods. Queensland hospital data were extracted to inform patients’ transitions between model health states and related costs captured in assigned treatment codes. Costs related to infection prevention were derived from reliable hospital records and expert opinion. Uncertainty of model input parameters was explored in probabilistic sensitivity analyses and scenario analyses and the value of perfect information was estimated. Results The cost-effectiveness analysis was performed from a health services perspective using a hypothetical cohort of 30,000 THA patients aged 65 years. The baseline rate of deep SSI was 0.96% within one year of a primary THA. The routine use of antibiotic prophylaxis (AP) was highly cost-effective and resulted in cost savings of over $1.6m whilst generating an extra 163 QALYs (without consideration of uncertainty). Deterministic and probabilistic analysis (considering uncertainty) identified antibiotic prophylaxis combined with antibiotic-impregnated cement (AP & ABC) to be the most cost-effective strategy. Using AP & ABC generated the highest net monetary benefit (NMB) and an incremental $3.1m NMB compared to only using antibiotic prophylaxis. There was a very low error probability that this strategy might not have the largest NMB (<5%). Not using antibiotic prophylaxis (No AP) or using both antibiotic prophylaxis combined with laminar air operating rooms (AP & LOR) resulted in worse health outcomes and higher costs. Sensitivity analyses showed that the model was sensitive to the initial cohort starting age and the additional costs of ABC but the best strategy did not change, even for extreme values. The cost-effectiveness improved for a higher proportion of cemented primary THAs and higher baseline rates of deep SSI. The value of perfect information indicated that no additional research is required to support the model conclusions. Conclusions Preventing deep SSI with antibiotic prophylaxis and antibiotic-impregnated cement has shown to improve health outcomes among hospitalised patients, save lives and enhance resource allocation. By implementing a more beneficial infection control strategy, scarce health care resources can be used more efficiently to the benefit of all members of society. The results of this project provide Australian policy makers with key information about how to efficiently manage risks of infection in THA.

Surgical treatment approaches and reimbursement costs of surgical site infections post hip arthroplasty in Australia : a retrospective analysis

BACKGROUND: The treatment for deep surgical site infection (SSI) following primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) varies internationally and it is at present unclear which treatment approaches are used in Australia. The aim of this study is to identify current treatment approaches in Queensland, Australia, show success rates and quantify the costs of different treatments. METHODS: Data for patients undergoing primary THA and treatment for infection between January 2006 and December 2009 in Queensland hospitals were extracted from routinely used hospital databases. Records were linked with pathology information to confirm positive organisms. Diagnosis and treatment of infection was determined using ICD-10-AM and ACHI codes, respectively. Treatment costs were estimated based on AR-DRG cost accounting codes assigned to each patient hospital episode. RESULTS: A total of n=114 patients with deep surgical site infection were identified. The majority of patients (74%) were first treated with debridement, antibiotics and implant retention (DAIR), which was successful in eradicating the infection in 60.3% of patients with an average cost of $13,187. The remaining first treatments were 1-stage revision, successful in 89.7% with average costs of $27,006, and 2-stage revisions, successful in 92.9% of cases with average costs of $42,772. Multiple treatments following 'failed DAIR' cost on average $29,560, for failed 1-stage revision were $24,357, for failed 2-stage revision were $70,381 and were $23,805 for excision arthroplasty. CONCLUSIONS: As treatment costs in Australia are high primary prevention is important and the economics of competing treatment choices should be carefully considered. These currently vary greatly across international settings.

The importance of good data, analysis and interpretation for showing the economics of reducing healthcare-associated infection

To the Editor—In a recent review article in Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology, Umscheid et al1 summarized published data on incidence rates of catheter-associated bloodstream infection (CABSI), catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI), surgical site infection (SSI), and ventilator- associated pneumonia (VAP); estimated how many cases are preventable; and calculated the savings in hospital costs and lives that would result from preventing all preventable cases. Providing these estimates to policy makers, political leaders, and health officials helps to galvanize their support for infection prevention programs. Our concern is that important limitations of the published studies on which Umscheid and colleagues built their findings are incompletely addressed in this review. More attention needs to be drawn to the techniques applied to generate these estimates...

Incidence and predictors of lower limb split-skin graft failure and primary closure dehiscence in day-case surgical patients

BACKGROUND After general surgery, the lower limb experiences some of the highest complication rates. However, little is known about contributing factors to surgical site failure in the lower limb dermatological surgery population. OBJECTIVE To determine the incidence of lower limb surgical site failure and to explore the predictors that contribute to surgical site failure. METHODS A prospective observational study design was used to collect data from 73 participants, from July 2010, to March 2012. Incidence was determined as a percentage of surgical site failure from the total population. Predictors were determined by the use of a binary logistic regression model. RESULTS The surgical site failure rate was 53.4%. Split-skin grafting had a higher failure rate than primary closures, 66% versus 26.1%. Predictors of lower limb surgical site failure were identified as increasing age (p = .04) and the presence of postoperative hematoma (p = .01), with all patients who developed surgical site infection experiencing surgical site failure (p = .01). CONCLUSION Findings from this study confirmed that the lower limb is at high risk of surgical site failure. Two predictors of surgical site failure from this cohort were determined. However, to understand this phenomenon and make recommendations to assist and reduce surgical site complications, further research in this field is required.

Differences in identifying healthcare associated infections using clinical vignettes and the influence of respondent characteristics: A cross-sectional survey of Australian infection prevention staff

Background Australia has commenced public reporting and benchmarking of healthcare associated infections (HAIs), despite not having a standardised national HAI surveillance program. Annual hospital Staphylococcus aureus bloodstream (SAB) infection rates are released online, with other HAIs likely to be reported in the future. Although there are known differences between hospitals in Australian HAI surveillance programs, the effect of these differences on reported HAI rates is not known. Objective To measure the agreement in HAI identification, classification, and calculation of HAI rates, and investigate the influence of differences amongst those undertaking surveillance on these outcomes. Methods A cross-sectional online survey exploring HAI surveillance practices was administered to infection prevention nurses who undertake HAI surveillance. Seven clinical vignettes describing HAI scenarios were included to measure agreement in HAI identification, classification, and calculation of HAI rates. Data on characteristics of respondents was also collected. Three of the vignettes were related to surgical site infection and four to bloodstream infection. Agreement levels for each of the vignettes were calculated. Using the Australian SAB definition, and the National Health and Safety Network definitions for other HAIs, we looked for an association between the proportion of correct answers and the respondents’ characteristics. Results Ninety-two infection prevention nurses responded to the vignettes. One vignette demonstrated 100 % agreement from responders, whilst agreement for the other vignettes varied from 53 to 75 %. Working in a hospital with more than 400 beds, working in a team, and State or Territory was associated with a correct response for two of the vignettes. Those trained in surveillance were more commonly associated with a correct response, whilst those working part-time were less likely to respond correctly. Conclusion These findings reveal the need for further HAI surveillance support for those working part-time and in smaller facilities. It also confirms the need to improve uniformity of HAI surveillance across Australian hospitals, and raises questions on the validity of the current comparing of national HAI SAB rates.

Variation in health care-associated infection surveillance practices in Australia

In the absence of a national health care-associated infection surveillance program in Australia, differences between existing state-based programs were explored using an online survey. Only 51% of respondents who undertake surveillance have been trained, fewer than half perform surgical site infection surveillance prospectively, and only 41% indicated they risk adjust surgical site infection data. Wide- spread variation of surveillance methods highlights future challenges when considering the development and implementation of a national program in Australia.