Search

Objective: To develop preliminary data on Staphylococcus aureus colonization and surgical site infections (SSIs) in patients with open fractures who received standard antibiotic prophylaxis compared with a regimen including targeted methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) coverage., Design: Randomized prospective clinical trial., Patients: Adult patients who presented to the emergency department with an open fracture between April 2009 and July 2011., Interventions: One hundred thirty patients were randomized to receive prophylaxis with either cefazolin alone (control arm) or vancomycin and cefazolin (experimental arm) from presentation to the emergency department until 24 hours after the surgical intervention. Screening for S. aureus carriage was performed with nares swabs and predebridement and postdebridement open fracture wound swabs. Patients underwent prospective assessment for the development of SSI for no less than 30 days and up to 12 months., Results: Nasal colonization of methicillin-sensitive S. aureus and MRSA among the sample was 20% and 3%, respectively. No significant difference in the rates of SSI was observed between the study arms (15% vs 19%, respectively, P = 0.62). Staphylococcus aureus caused 55% of the deep incisional/organ space SSI, with 18% attributed to MRSA. A significantly higher rate of MRSA SSIs was observed among MRSA carriers compared with noncarriers (33% vs 1%, respectively, P = 0.003)., Conclusions: Staphylococcus aureus nasal colonization in trauma patients with open fractures is similar to that of the general community. In this pilot study, the addition of vancomycin to standard antibiotic prophylaxis was found safe, but its efficacy should be evaluated in a larger multiinstitutional trial.

Objective: To determine the frequency, root cause, and outcome of wrong-site and wrong-patient procedures in the era of the Universal Protocol., Design: Analysis of a prospective physician insurance database performed from January 1, 2002, to June 1, 2008. Deidentified cases were screened using predefined taxonomy filters, and data were analyzed by evaluation criteria defined a priori., Setting: Colorado., Patients: Database contained 27 370 physician self-reported adverse occurrences., Main Outcome Measures: Descriptive statistics were generated to examine the characteristics of the reporting physicians, the number of adverse events reported per year, and the root causes and occurrence-related patient outcomes., Results: A total of 25 wrong-patient and 107 wrong-site procedures were identified during the study period. Significant harm was inflicted in 5 wrong-patient procedures (20.0%) and 38 wrong-site procedures (35.5%). One patient died secondary to a wrong-site procedure (0.9%). The main root causes leading to wrong-patient procedures were errors in diagnosis (56.0%) and errors in communication (100%), whereas wrong-site occurrences were related to errors in judgment (85.0%) and the lack of performing a "time-out" (72.0%). Nonsurgical specialties were involved in the cause of wrong-patient procedures and contributed equally with surgical disciplines to adverse outcome related to wrong-site occurrences., Conclusions: These data reveal a persisting high frequency of surgical "never events." Strict adherence to the Universal Protocol must be expanded to nonsurgical specialties to promote a zero-tolerance philosophy for these preventable incidents.