Main Operating Room Versus Field Sterility in Hand Surgery: A Review of the Evidence.

IF 0.7 4区 医学 Q4 SURGERY Plastic surgery Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2023-03-20 DOI:10.1177/22925503231161073
Natan Silver, Donald H Lalonde
{"title":"Main Operating Room Versus Field Sterility in Hand Surgery: A Review of the Evidence.","authors":"Natan Silver, Donald H Lalonde","doi":"10.1177/22925503231161073","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Introduction:</b> Many of the guidelines that are generally accepted as main operating room best practices are not evidence based. They are based on the concept that if some sterility is good, more must be better. They are not derived from evidence-based sterility. Evidence-based sterility is the study of which of our various sterility practices increase or decrease our infection rates, as opposed to guidelines based on how many bacteria are in the operating room. <b>Methods:</b> This article adds the most important evidence we could find that is not included in the first paper on evidence-based sterility in hand surgery published in 2019. In this review, we also balance the evidence with common sense opinion. <b>Results:</b> The 21st century has seen a rapid rise in the number and reports of hand surgery procedures performed with field sterility outside the main operating room. There is now an abundance of good evidence to support that the rate of infection is not higher when many hand operations are performed with field sterility in minor procedure rooms. <b>Conclusion:</b> Moving hand surgery out of the main operating room to minor procedure rooms should be supported by healthcare providers. The higher cost, increased solid waste, and inconvenience of main operating room surgery are not justifiable for many procedures because it does not reduce the risk of postoperative infection.</p>","PeriodicalId":20206,"journal":{"name":"Plastic surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11492193/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Plastic surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/22925503231161073","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/3/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Many of the guidelines that are generally accepted as main operating room best practices are not evidence based. They are based on the concept that if some sterility is good, more must be better. They are not derived from evidence-based sterility. Evidence-based sterility is the study of which of our various sterility practices increase or decrease our infection rates, as opposed to guidelines based on how many bacteria are in the operating room. Methods: This article adds the most important evidence we could find that is not included in the first paper on evidence-based sterility in hand surgery published in 2019. In this review, we also balance the evidence with common sense opinion. Results: The 21st century has seen a rapid rise in the number and reports of hand surgery procedures performed with field sterility outside the main operating room. There is now an abundance of good evidence to support that the rate of infection is not higher when many hand operations are performed with field sterility in minor procedure rooms. Conclusion: Moving hand surgery out of the main operating room to minor procedure rooms should be supported by healthcare providers. The higher cost, increased solid waste, and inconvenience of main operating room surgery are not justifiable for many procedures because it does not reduce the risk of postoperative infection.

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
手外科主手术室与野外无菌:证据综述
引言:许多被公认为主要手术室最佳实践的指南都不是基于证据的。它们基于这样一个概念,即如果一些无菌性是好的,那么越多越好。它们并非来源于循证不育。基于证据的无菌是研究我们的各种无菌做法中哪一种会增加或降低我们的感染率,而不是基于手术室中有多少细菌的指导方针。方法:这篇文章添加了我们能发现的最重要的证据,这些证据没有包括在2019年发表的第一篇关于手外科循证无菌的论文中。在这篇综述中,我们还平衡了证据和常识性意见。结果:21世纪,在主手术室外进行无菌手外科手术的数量和报告迅速增加。现在有大量的好证据支持,当许多手部手术在小手术室进行现场无菌时,感染率并不高。结论:将手部手术从主手术室转移到小手术室应该得到医疗保健提供者的支持。对于许多手术来说,主手术室手术的成本更高、固体废物增加和不便是不合理的,因为它不能降低术后感染的风险。
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
Plastic surgery
Plastic surgery Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
73
期刊介绍: Plastic Surgery (Chirurgie Plastique) is the official journal of the Canadian Society of Plastic Surgeons, the Canadian Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, Group for the Advancement of Microsurgery, and the Canadian Society for Surgery of the Hand. It serves as a major venue for Canadian research, society guidelines, and continuing medical education.
期刊最新文献
The Nasolabial Flap in Nose Reconstruction: Tips and Tricks Towards Expanded Usage and Optimized Cosmesis. Outcomes of Fat Grafting in the Active Versus Quiescent Phase of Localized Scleroderma. Management of Scaphoid Pseudoarthrosis Surgery with Wide-Awake Local Anesthesia No Tourniquet (WALANT) Versus Axillary Block Anesthesia: Comparison of Patient Satisfaction. Breast Reconstruction Perceptions and Access in First Nations Women Are Influenced by Colonization. Home Programs are Key: A Cross-Sectional Analysis of the 2022 Integrated Plastic Surgery Residency Match.
×
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