Surgical Site Infections Persist, But Why?

Cheryl Clark, for HealthLeaders Media , May 31, 2012

Observations demand inquiry
But Faraday's report, which was published this week in the Annals of Surgery, makes some observations that should provoke more inquiry.

The paper shows that patients who incurred a wound infection requiring antibiotic treatment in the past were three times more likely to develop a painful, costly infection related to a subsequent surgery than surgical patients who hadn't had a prior infection.

That was true after Faraday adjusted for all sorts of confounders, such as age, co-morbidities, and medications, he says.

"One of the reasons we are so concerned about the potential for punitive action is that we controlled for all the things that CMS wants us to do to prevent infections," says Faraday, an associate professor of anesthesiology and critical care medicine.

"We controlled for how you prep the skin, how you administer the antibiotics, and make sure antibiotics are given on time. And we still found that there was a much higher risk if a patient had a prior infection."

Additionally, he says, the CMS policy is not designed to penalize those hospitals that have higher rates of surgical site infections, "but to penalize any hospital, regardless of what the rate is, because if (any patient) develops one of these infections where you are, you're going to suffer some financial penalty."

Genetic predisposition?

Faraday and colleagues propose that there's an underlying genetic predisposition to surgical infections in some people, which is why these patients contracted their first infection and why they are much more likely to suffer one again when they have surgery.

"If you've had a spontaneous infection in the past, that might be a clue that the immune system in your skin, or some other cells that go to your skin to treat infection so that it doesn't become a problem for you—that somewhere along the line your mechanism may be different," Faraday says.

"We all get a cut sometimes in our daily lives, and we're all exposed to bacteria, but most of us will never experience a clinical infection of our skin."

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5

Comments are moderated. Please be patient.

1 comments on "Surgical Site Infections Persist, But Why?"

Paula Forte (5/31/2012 at 3:51 PM)
Your author asks, if we found vulnerable DNA, "Would we do more prep work than we do now? Keep these patients in the hospital longer? Not allow them to have surgery?" We don't have the DNA test to prove vulnerability to SSIs but we do know when our patients are poor surgical risks. For them we DO delay surgery and work with them and their faimilies in a specialty clinc (sometimes for up to a year) to build protein stores, pulmonary function, etc. in order to enhance their outcomes (and ours) when surgery is performed. We are not to zero yet, but for our population which is already high risk, thanks to incredible vigilance on many clinician's part, we beat the NHSN benchmark most quarters.




FREE e-Newsletters Join the Council Subscribe to HL magazine


100 Winners Circle Suite 300
Brentwood, TN 37027


About | Advertise | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Reprints/Permissions | Contact
© HealthLeaders Media 2015 a division of BLR All rights reserved.