Green Cystoscopy: Does Minimizing the Use of Drapes Increase Infection Rates?

IF 0.8 Q4 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY Urogynecology (Hagerstown, Md.) Pub Date : 2024-11-08 DOI:10.1097/SPV.0000000000001602
Alexandra I Melnyk, Erin E Mowers, Isabel Janmey, Leslie A Meyn, Noe Woods, Pamela Moalli
{"title":"Green Cystoscopy: Does Minimizing the Use of Drapes Increase Infection Rates?","authors":"Alexandra I Melnyk, Erin E Mowers, Isabel Janmey, Leslie A Meyn, Noe Woods, Pamela Moalli","doi":"10.1097/SPV.0000000000001602","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>The U.S. health care system has an enormous carbon footprint made worse by the escalating use of single-use supplies. Emerging evidence suggests that smaller surgical fields (\"green\" draping) may represent a safe alternative to traditional draping.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The aim of the study was to determine if the proportion of cases treated for culture-proven urinary tract infection (UTI) within 2 weeks of operating room cystoscopy after the green draping protocol implementation is noninferior to preprotocol cases. Secondary objectives included risk factors for UTI and waste and cost savings.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>A pre-post implementation noninferiority study was performed from 2021 to 2023 in a urogynecology division at an academic medical center. The green draping protocol eliminated the use of top drapes, leg drapes, and gowns; blue towels were permitted per the surgeon's discretion. All minor cystoscopy cases were included.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The cohort included 240 patients. Treatment of culture-proven UTI in the green cohort was noninferior to the preprotocol group (9 [7.5%] vs 7 [5.8%], P < 0.05). The odds of a culture-proven UTI were higher with history of recurrent UTI (odds ratio = 7.02), interstitial cystitis/bladder pain syndrome (odds ratio = 4.33), and older age (odds ratio per 5-year increase = 1.21). Approximately $1,403.92 (2023 USD) was saved, and 165 pounds of waste was diverted from the landfill.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A green draping protocol is noninferior to standard draping with respect to rates of postoperative culture-positive UTIs. Clinicians may use a smaller operating room field to decrease the carbon footprint without compromising quality of care.</p>","PeriodicalId":75288,"journal":{"name":"Urogynecology (Hagerstown, Md.)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urogynecology (Hagerstown, Md.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/SPV.0000000000001602","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Importance: The U.S. health care system has an enormous carbon footprint made worse by the escalating use of single-use supplies. Emerging evidence suggests that smaller surgical fields ("green" draping) may represent a safe alternative to traditional draping.

Objectives: The aim of the study was to determine if the proportion of cases treated for culture-proven urinary tract infection (UTI) within 2 weeks of operating room cystoscopy after the green draping protocol implementation is noninferior to preprotocol cases. Secondary objectives included risk factors for UTI and waste and cost savings.

Study design: A pre-post implementation noninferiority study was performed from 2021 to 2023 in a urogynecology division at an academic medical center. The green draping protocol eliminated the use of top drapes, leg drapes, and gowns; blue towels were permitted per the surgeon's discretion. All minor cystoscopy cases were included.

Results: The cohort included 240 patients. Treatment of culture-proven UTI in the green cohort was noninferior to the preprotocol group (9 [7.5%] vs 7 [5.8%], P < 0.05). The odds of a culture-proven UTI were higher with history of recurrent UTI (odds ratio = 7.02), interstitial cystitis/bladder pain syndrome (odds ratio = 4.33), and older age (odds ratio per 5-year increase = 1.21). Approximately $1,403.92 (2023 USD) was saved, and 165 pounds of waste was diverted from the landfill.

Conclusions: A green draping protocol is noninferior to standard draping with respect to rates of postoperative culture-positive UTIs. Clinicians may use a smaller operating room field to decrease the carbon footprint without compromising quality of care.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
绿色膀胱镜检查:尽量减少敷料的使用会增加感染率吗?
重要性:美国医疗保健系统的碳足迹巨大,一次性用品的使用量不断攀升使其变得更加严重。新的证据表明,较小的手术区域("绿色 "铺巾)可能是传统铺巾的安全替代品:该研究旨在确定在实施绿色铺巾方案后,手术室膀胱镜检查后 2 周内经培养证实的尿路感染(UTI)病例的治疗比例是否不低于方案实施前的病例。次要目标包括UTI的风险因素以及浪费和成本节约:研究设计:2021 年至 2023 年,在一家学术医疗中心的泌尿妇科进行了一项实施前-实施后非劣效研究。绿色铺巾方案取消了上铺巾、腿部铺巾和手术服的使用;允许外科医生自行决定使用蓝色毛巾。所有小型膀胱镜检查病例均包括在内:结果:共纳入 240 例患者。绿色队列中经培养证实的UTI治疗效果不优于协议前组别(9 [7.5%] vs 7 [5.8%],P < 0.05)。有复发性UTI病史(几率比=7.02)、间质性膀胱炎/膀胱疼痛综合征(几率比=4.33)和年龄较大(每增加5岁的几率比=1.21)的患者发生经培养证实的UTI的几率更高。节约了约 1,403.92 美元(2023 年),从垃圾填埋场转移了 165 磅废物:结论:就术后培养阳性 UTI 的发生率而言,绿色铺巾方案并不比标准铺巾方案差。临床医生可以在不影响医疗质量的前提下,使用较小的手术室面积来减少碳足迹。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Development and Validation of a Simulation Model for Ureteral Stent Placement. Implementing a Digital Platform for Recurrent Urinary Tract Infections. Unexpected Pathology During Pelvic Organ Prolapse Repair in an Urban Population. Green Cystoscopy: Does Minimizing the Use of Drapes Increase Infection Rates? Noninferiority Randomized Clinical Trial: KIM Sling With Reusable Trocars Versus TVT Exact Sling.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1