Piloting a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study design at a community hospital to evaluate prophylactic antibiotics in endoscopic carpal tunnel release: Clinical, logistic, and economic considerations

Derek Hayden, Chelsea Bush, Richard Trevino
{"title":"Piloting a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study design at a community hospital to evaluate prophylactic antibiotics in endoscopic carpal tunnel release: Clinical, logistic, and economic considerations","authors":"Derek Hayden,&nbsp;Chelsea Bush,&nbsp;Richard Trevino","doi":"10.1016/j.orthop.2021.08.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Surgical site infection is low following endoscopic carpal tunnel release (ECTR), yet antibiotic prophylaxis is still common in these procedures. This study piloted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study design at a community hospital to generate discourse in support of discontinuing antibiotic prophylaxis in ECTR procedures.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Patients undergoing dual-incision endoscopic carpal tunnel release at a single community hospital between May 1, 2018 and December 31, 2020 were enrolled in a pilot study. Subjects were randomized to prophylactic antibiotics or placebo saline solution arms. Infection rates and complications were compared. Study workflow processes were streamlined to facilitate eventual study duplication at additional sites.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>One hundred twenty-four subjects (140 hands) were included in the final analysis. No subjects in either study arm sustained an infection. The race and ethnic distributions of the study sample closely resembled those of the census-reported community distributions. Implementing a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study at a community hospital presented numerous challenges.</p></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><p>Although statistical nor clinical significance could be established in the absence of infection, these results validate what is presently known regarding the low likelihood of infection in clean hand surgery and demonstrated the feasibility of designing and implementing methodologically sound research in a community setting.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Duplicating this study design at additional research sites can provide the level of evidence necessary to discourage unnecessary prophylactic antibiotic administration in clean hand surgery.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100994,"journal":{"name":"Orthoplastic Surgery","volume":"6 ","pages":"Pages 7-10"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.orthop.2021.08.004","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Orthoplastic Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666769X21000294","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Surgical site infection is low following endoscopic carpal tunnel release (ECTR), yet antibiotic prophylaxis is still common in these procedures. This study piloted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study design at a community hospital to generate discourse in support of discontinuing antibiotic prophylaxis in ECTR procedures.

Methods

Patients undergoing dual-incision endoscopic carpal tunnel release at a single community hospital between May 1, 2018 and December 31, 2020 were enrolled in a pilot study. Subjects were randomized to prophylactic antibiotics or placebo saline solution arms. Infection rates and complications were compared. Study workflow processes were streamlined to facilitate eventual study duplication at additional sites.

Results

One hundred twenty-four subjects (140 hands) were included in the final analysis. No subjects in either study arm sustained an infection. The race and ethnic distributions of the study sample closely resembled those of the census-reported community distributions. Implementing a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study at a community hospital presented numerous challenges.

Discussion

Although statistical nor clinical significance could be established in the absence of infection, these results validate what is presently known regarding the low likelihood of infection in clean hand surgery and demonstrated the feasibility of designing and implementing methodologically sound research in a community setting.

Conclusion

Duplicating this study design at additional research sites can provide the level of evidence necessary to discourage unnecessary prophylactic antibiotic administration in clean hand surgery.

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
在一家社区医院进行一项随机、双盲、安慰剂对照的研究设计,以评估内镜下腕管释放中的预防性抗生素:临床、后勤和经济考虑
内镜下腕管释放术(ECTR)后手术部位感染较低,但抗生素预防在这些手术中仍然很常见。本研究在一家社区医院进行了一项随机、双盲、安慰剂对照的研究设计,以支持在ECTR手术中停止抗生素预防。方法2018年5月1日至2020年12月31日在一家社区医院接受双切口内镜下腕管松解术的患者纳入一项试点研究。受试者随机分为预防性抗生素组和安慰剂生理盐水组。比较两组的感染率和并发症。简化了研究工作流程,以便最终在其他地点重复进行研究。结果124名受试者(140只手)纳入最终分析。两组研究对象均未发生感染。研究样本的种族和民族分布与人口普查报告的社区分布非常相似。在社区医院实施一项随机、双盲、安慰剂对照的研究面临许多挑战。虽然在没有感染的情况下无法建立统计学和临床意义,但这些结果证实了目前已知的清洁手手术感染可能性低的事实,并证明了在社区环境中设计和实施方法学上合理的研究的可行性。结论在其他研究地点重复本研究设计可以提供必要的证据水平,以阻止清洁手手术中不必要的预防性抗生素使用。
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
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Spino-plastic surgery Erratum regarding previously published articles Editorial Board Composite osteo-tendino-cutaneous reverse radial forearm flap for complex thumb reconstruction: A case report The keystone island perforator flap: An “ideal” local soft tissue flap for the lower extremity
×
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