Search

The intent of this document is to highlight practical recommendations in a concise format designed to assist acute-care hospitals in implementing and prioritizing their surgical-site infection (SSI) prevention efforts. This document updates the Strategies to Prevent Surgical Site Infections in Acute Care Hospitals published in 2014. This expert guidance document is sponsored by the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (SHEA). It is the product of a collaborative effort led by SHEA, the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA), the Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology (APIC), the American Hospital Association (AHA), and The Joint Commission, with major contributions from representatives of a number of organizations and societies with content expertise.

BackgroundTraditional approaches for surgical site infection (SSI) surveillance have deficiencies that delay detection of SSI outbreaks and other clinically important increases in SSI rates. We investigated whether use of optimised statistical process control (SPC) methods and feedback for SSI surveillance would decrease rates of SSI in a network of US community hospitals.MethodsWe conducted a stepped wedge cluster randomised trial of patients who underwent any of 13 types of common surgical procedures across 29 community hospitals in the Southeastern United States. We divided the 13 procedures into six clusters; a cluster of procedures at a single hospital was the unit of randomisation and analysis. In total, 105 clusters were randomised to 12 groups of 8-10 clusters. All participating clusters began the trial in a 12-month baseline period of control or "traditional" SSI surveillance, including prospective analysis of SSI rates and consultative support for SSI outbreaks and investigations. Thereafter, a group of clusters transitioned from control to intervention surveillance every three months until all clusters received the intervention. Electronic randomisation by the study statistician determined the sequence by which clusters crossed over from control to intervention surveillance. The intervention was the addition of weekly application of optimised SPC methods and feedback to existing traditional SSI surveillance methods. Epidemiologists were blinded to hospital identity and randomisation status while adjudicating SPC signals of increased SSI rates, but blinding was not possible during SSI investigations. The primary outcome was the overall SSI prevalence rate (PR=SSIs/100 procedures), evaluated via generalised estimating equations with a Poisson regression model. Secondary outcomes compared traditional and optimised SPC signals that identified SSI rate increases, including the number of formal SSI investigations generated and deficiencies identified in best practices for SSI prevention. This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03075813.FindingsBetween Mar 1, 2016, and Feb 29, 2020, 204,233 unique patients underwent 237,704 surgical procedures. 148,365 procedures received traditional SSI surveillance and feedback alone, and 89,339 procedures additionally received the intervention of optimised SPC surveillance. The primary outcome of SSI was assessed for all procedures performed within participating clusters. SSIs occurred after 1171 procedures assigned control surveillance (prevalence rate [PR] 0.79 per 100 procedures), compared to 781 procedures that received the intervention (PR 0·87 per 100 procedures; model-based PR ratio 1.10, 95% CI 0.94-1.30, p=0.25). Traditional surveillance generated 24 formal SSI investigations that identified 120 SSIs with deficiencies in two or more perioperative best practices for SSI prevention. In comparison, optimised SPC surveillance generated 74 formal investigations that identified 458 SSIs with multiple best practice deficiencies.InterpretationThe addition of optimised SPC methods and feedback to traditional methods for SSI surveillance led to greater detection of important SSI rate increases and best practice deficiencies but did not decrease SSI rates. Additional research is needed to determine how to best utilise SPC methods and feedback to improve adherence to SSI quality measures and prevent SSIs.FundingAgency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

Antibiotic-resistant pathogens cause over 35,000 preventable deaths in the United States every year, and multiple strategies could decrease morbidity and mortality. As antibiotic stewardship requirements are being deployed for the outpatient setting, community providers are facing systematic challenges in implementing stewardship programs. Given that the vast majority of antibiotics are prescribed in the outpatient setting, there are endless opportunities to make a smart and informed choice when prescribing and to move the needle on antibiotic stewardship. Antibiotic stewardship in the community, or smart prescribing as we suggest, should factor in antibiotic efficacy, safety, local resistance rates, and overall cost, in addition to patient-specific factors and disease presentation, to arrive at an appropriate therapy. Here, we discuss some of the challenges, such as patient/parent pressure to prescribe, lack of data or resources for implementation, and a disconnect between guidelines and real-world practice, among others. We have assembled an easy-to-use best practice guide for providers in the outpatient setting who lack the time or resources to develop a plan or consult lengthy guidelines. We provide specific suggestions for antibiotic prescribing that align real-world clinical practice with best practices for antibiotic stewardship for two of the most common bacterial infections seen in the outpatient setting: community-acquired pneumonia and skin and soft-tissue infection. In addition, we discuss many ways that community providers, payors, and regulatory bodies can make antibiotic stewardship easier to implement and more streamlined in the outpatient setting.

BACKGROUNDSurgical site infections (SSIs) following colorectal surgery (CRS) are among the most common healthcare-associated infections (HAIs). Reduction in colorectal SSI rates is an important goal for surgical quality improvement.OBJECTIVETo examine rates of SSI in patients with and without cancer and to identify potential predictors of SSI risk following CRSDESIGNAmerican College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) data files for 2011-2013 from a sample of 12 National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) member institutions were combined. Pooled SSI rates for colorectal procedures were calculated and risk was evaluated. The independent importance of potential risk factors was assessed using logistic regression.SETTINGMulticenter studyPARTICIPANTSOf 22 invited NCCN centers, 11 participated (50%). Colorectal procedures were selected by principal procedure current procedural technology (CPT) code. Cancer was defined by International Classification of Disease, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) codes.MAIN OUTCOMEThe primary outcome of interest was 30-day SSI rate.RESULTSA total of 652 SSIs (11.06%) were reported among 5,893 CRSs. Risk of SSI was similar for patients with and without cancer. Among CRS patients with underlying cancer, disseminated cancer (SSI rate, 17.5%; odds ratio [OR], 1.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.23-2.26; P=.001), ASA score ≥3 (OR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.09-1.83; P=.001), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD; OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.06-2.53; P=.02), and longer duration of procedure were associated with development of SSI.CONCLUSIONSPatients with disseminated cancer are at a higher risk for developing SSI. ASA score >3, COPD, and longer duration of surgery predict SSI risk. Disseminated cancer should be further evaluated by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in generating risk-adjusted outcomes.Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2018;39:555-562.

Desirability of outcome ranking and response adjusted for duration of antibiotic risk (DOOR/RADAR) are novel and innovative methods of evaluating data in antibiotic trials. We analyzed data from a noninferiority trial of short-course antimicrobial therapy for intra-abdominal infection (STOP-IT), and results suggest global superiority of short-duration therapy for intra-abdominal infections.

BackgroundRecent studies have suggested the length of treatment of intra-abdominal infections (IAIs) can be shortened without detrimental effects on patient outcomes. However, data from high-risk patient populations are lacking. We hypothesized that patients at high risk for treatment failure will benefit from a longer course of antimicrobial therapy.MethodsPatients enrolled in the Study to Optimize Peritoneal Infection Therapy (STOP-IT) trial were evaluated retrospectively to identify risk factors associated with treatment failure, which was defined as the composite outcome of recurrent IAI, surgical site infection, or death. Variables were considered risk factors if there was a positive statistical association with treatment failure. Patients were then stratified according to the presence and number of these risk factors. Univariable analyses were performed using the Kruskal-Wallis, χ2, and Fisher exact tests. Logistic regression controlling for risk factors and original randomization group, either a fixed four-day antimicrobial regimen (experimental) or a longer course based on clinical response (control), also was performed.ResultsWe identified corticosteroid use, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score ≥5, hospital-acquired infection, or a colonic source of IAI as risk factors associated with treatment failure. Of the 517 patients enrolled, 263 (50.9%) had one or two risk factors and 16 (3.1%) had three or four risk factors. The rate of treatment failure rose as the number of risk factors increased. When controlling for randomization group, the presence and number of risk factors were independently associated with treatment failure, but the duration of antimicrobial therapy was not.ConclusionsWe were able to identify patients at high risk for treatment failure in the STOP-IT trial. Such patients did not benefit from a longer course of antibiotic administration. Further study is needed to determine the optimum duration of antimicrobial therapy in high-risk patients.

This article is part of a clinical practice guideline update on the risk assessment, diagnostic imaging, and microbiological evaluation of complicated intra-abdominal infections in adults, children, and pregnant people, developed by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. In this article, the panel provides recommendations for diagnostic imaging of suspected acute intra-abdominal abscess. The panel's recommendations are based on evidence derived from systematic literature reviews and adhere to a standardized methodology for rating the certainty of evidence and strength of recommendation according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper is part of a clinical practice guideline update on the risk assessment, diagnostic imaging, and microbiological evaluation of complicated intra-abdominal infections in adults, children, and pregnant people, developed by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. In this paper, the panel provides recommendations for obtaining cultures of intra-abdominal fluid in patients with known or suspected intra-abdominal infection. The panel's recommendations are based on evidence derived from systematic literature reviews and adhere to a standardized methodology for rating the certainty of evidence and strength of recommendation according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article is part of a clinical practice guideline update on the risk assessment, diagnostic imaging, and microbiological evaluation of complicated intra-abdominal infections in adults, children, and pregnant people, developed by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. In this guideline, the panel provides recommendations for obtaining blood cultures in patients with known or suspected intra-abdominal infection. The panel's recommendations are based on evidence derived from systematic literature reviews and adhere to a standardized methodology for rating the certainty of evidence and strength of recommendation according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper is part of a clinical practice guideline update on the risk assessment, diagnostic imaging, and microbiological evaluation of complicated intra-abdominal infections in adults, children, and pregnant people, developed by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. In this paper, the panel provides recommendations for diagnostic imaging of suspected acute diverticulitis. The panel's recommendations are based on evidence derived from systematic literature reviews and adhere to a standardized methodology for rating the certainty of evidence and strength of recommendation according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article is part of a clinical practice guideline update on the risk assessment, diagnostic imaging, and microbiological evaluation of complicated intraabdominal infections in adults, children, and pregnant people, developed by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. In this article, the panel provides recommendations for diagnostic imaging of suspected acute cholecystitis and acute cholangitis. The panel's recommendations are based on evidence derived from systematic literature reviews and adhere to a standardized methodology for rating the certainty of evidence and strength of recommendation according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper is part of a clinical practice guideline update on the risk assessment, diagnostic imaging, and microbiological evaluation of complicated intra-abdominal infections in adults, children, and pregnant people, developed by the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA). In this paper, the panel provides recommendations for diagnostic imaging of suspected acute appendicitis. The panel's recommendations are based on evidence derived from systematic literature reviews and adhere to a standardized methodology for rating the certainty of evidence and strength of recommendation according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper is part of a clinical practice guideline update on the risk assessment, diagnostic imaging, and microbiological evaluation of complicated intra-abdominal infections in adults, children, and pregnant people, developed by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. In this paper, the panel provides a recommendation for risk stratification according to severity of illness score. The panel's recommendation is based on evidence derived from systematic literature reviews and adheres to a standardized methodology for rating the certainty of evidence and strength of recommendation according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As the first part of an update to the clinical practice guideline on the diagnosis and management of complicated intra-abdominal infections in adults, children, and pregnant people, developed by the Infectious Diseases Society of America, the panel presents 21 updated recommendations. These recommendations span risk assessment, diagnostic imaging, and microbiological evaluation. The panel's recommendations are based on evidence derived from systematic literature reviews and adhere to a standardized methodology for rating the certainty of evidence and strength of recommendation according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BackgroundThe successful treatment of intraabdominal infection requires a combination of anatomical source control and antibiotics. The appropriate duration of antimicrobial therapy remains unclear.MethodsWe randomly assigned 518 patients with complicated intraabdominal infection and adequate source control to receive antibiotics until 2 days after the resolution of fever, leukocytosis, and ileus, with a maximum of 10 days of therapy (control group), or to receive a fixed course of antibiotics (experimental group) for 4±1 calendar days. The primary outcome was a composite of surgical-site infection, recurrent intraabdominal infection, or death within 30 days after the index source-control procedure, according to treatment group. Secondary outcomes included the duration of therapy and rates of subsequent infections.ResultsSurgical-site infection, recurrent intraabdominal infection, or death occurred in 56 of 257 patients in the experimental group (21.8%), as compared with 58 of 260 patients in the control group (22.3%) (absolute difference, -0.5 percentage point; 95% confidence interval [CI], -7.0 to 8.0; P=0.92). The median duration of antibiotic therapy was 4.0 days (interquartile range, 4.0 to 5.0) in the experimental group, as compared with 8.0 days (interquartile range, 5.0 to 10.0) in the control group (absolute difference, -4.0 days; 95% CI, -4.7 to -3.3; P

Background: Surgical antibiotic prophylaxis practice became common in the 1970s and has since become almost universal. The earliest articles used three doses over 12 hours with the first being administered before the start of the operation. Conclusions: The duration of prophylaxis has varied widely in practice over time, but an increasing body of evidence has supported shorter durations, most recently with recommendations in influential guidelines to avoid administration after the incision is closed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]