Search

Objective: To assess whether structured team briefings improve operating room communication., Design, Setting, and Participants: This 13-month prospective study used a preintervention/postintervention design. All staff and trainees in the division of general surgery at a Canadian academic tertiary care hospital were invited to participate. Participants included 11 general surgeons, 24 surgical trainees, 41 operating room nurses, 28 anesthesiologists, and 24 anesthesia trainees., Intervention: Surgeons, nurses, and anesthesiologists gathered before 302 patient procedures for a short team briefing structured by a checklist. Main Outcome Measure The primary outcome measure was the number of communication failures (late, inaccurate, unresolved, or exclusive communication) per procedure. Communication failures and their consequences were documented by 1 of 4 trained observers using a validated observational scale. Secondary outcomes were the number of checklist briefings that demonstrated "utility" (an effect on the knowledge or actions of the team) and participants' perceptions of the briefing experience., Results: One hundred seventy-two procedures were observed (86 preintervention, 86 postintervention). The mean (SD) number of communication failures per procedure declined from 3.95 (3.20) before the intervention to 1.31 (1.53) after the intervention (P < .001). Thirty-four percent of briefings demonstrated utility, including identification of problems, resolution of critical knowledge gaps, decision-making, and follow-up actions., Conclusions: Interprofessional checklist briefings reduced the number of communication failures and promoted proactive and collaborative team communication.

Objective: To test the hypothesis that comprehensive broad-spectrum empirical antimicrobial therapy is superior to limited-spectrum empirical antimicrobial therapy in intra-abdominal infections., Design: Prospective, randomized, double-blinded study., Setting: University-affiliated hospitals in Canada., Patients: Two hundred thirteen patients with intra-abdominal infections and planned operative or percutaneous drainage., Intervention: Limited-spectrum empirical antimicrobial therapy consisted of cefoxitin sodium, 2 g, intravenously, every 6 hours (n = 109). Comprehensive broad-spectrum empirical antimicrobial therapy consisted of a combination of imipenem and cilastatin sodium, 500 mg, intravenously, every 6 hours (n = 104)., Main Outcome Measures: Failure to cure the intra-abdominal infection (persistence of infection or death)., Results: Of initial isolates, 98% were sensitive to imipenem plus cilastin sodium compared with 72% for cefoxitin. No difference was found in the failure rate between treatment groups. Among various reasons for failure (including technical), 12 of 80 patients in the limited-spectrum empirical antimicrobial therapy group had resistant organisms at a second intervention compared with 1 of 74 in the comprehensive broad-spectrum empirical antimicrobial therapy group (P < .003, chi 2). One death in the limited-spectrum empirical antimicrobial therapy group was due to autopsy-proved disseminated Pseudomonas aeruginosa (blood, peritoneum, lung, and pleural fluid) that was resistant to cefoxitin, and the other was associated with peritonitis due to cefoxitin-resistant Enterobacter cloacae. One death in the comprehensive broad-spectrum empirical antimicrobial therapy group was associated with peritonitis from Clostridium perfringens that was sensitive to imipenem plus cilastin sodium, and the other was associated with peritonitis from Pseudomonas aeruginosa that was resistant to imipenem plus cilastin sodium., Conclusion: Treatment failure of intra-abdominal infection may be due, in part, to the presence of resistant pathogens at the site of infection. Therefore, routine culture of these sites seems worthwhile and empirical therapy should be as comprehensive as possible and should cover all potential pathogens.

The risk of transfer of vancomycin resistance to staphylococci is a real possibility and has been achieved in the laboratory. Prolonged colonization occurs with vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE), and many more patients are colonized than infected. The failure to identify, isolate, and adhere to infection control measures when caring for VRE-colonized patients dooms to failure any means to control its spread. Control of vancomycin use alone is unlikely to greatly affect the number of patients at risk for VRE colonization. The global spread of VRE may be impossible to stop, but infection control measures are the most important line of defense inside hospitals.

Objective: To compare the outcome of abdominal infection in patients with or without previous systemic glucocorticoid therapy and to determine the effect of steroid administration on the relationship between APACHE II (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation) scores and mortality., Hypothesis: Steroid therapy leads to greater mortality and relatively lower APACHE II scores., Design: Prospective cohort study., Setting: University hospital., Patients: Two hundred ninety-seven consecutive adult patients with abdominal infection treated by surgical or percutaneous drainage. Treatment was at the clinician's discretion. Seventy-one patients received systemic steroid therapy., Outcome Measures: APACHE II score, clinical course, and death in hospital; relationship between APACHE II score and mortality in the steroid and no steroid groups., Results: Thirty-three patients receiving steroid therapy (46%) died vs 55 (24%) of 226 patients not receiving steroid therapy. The APACHE II score (P < .0001) and steroid administration (P = .04) were each independently associated with death. Steroid-treated patients had the same probability of dying as "nonsteroid" patients with an APACHE II score a mean of 3.7 points higher (95% confidence limits, 0.03 and 7.7). The confidence that 2, 3, or 4 extra APACHE II points is the appropriate correction for steroid-treated patients is 80%, 60%, or 40%, respectively., Conclusions: Patients receiving steroid therapy appear to be at higher risk of dying of abdominal infection than predicted by APACHE II scores. The number of patients receiving cancer chemotherapy was too small to determine whether this was an additional risk factor. In the design of clinical trials stratified by APACHE II scores, steroid-treated patients should either be excluded or assigned two extra APACHE II points.

Prophylactic administration of antibiotics can decrease postoperative morbidity, shorten hospitalization, and reduce the overall costs attributable to infections. Principles of prophylaxis include providing effective levels of antibiotics in the decisive interval, and, in most instances, limiting the course to intraoperative coverage only. Use in The National Research Council clean contaminated operations is appropriate and, in many instances, has been proven beneficial. Antibiotic prophylaxis is also indicated for clean operations, such as those involved with insertion of prosthetic devices, that are associated with low infection risk and high morbidity. Extension of antibiotic prophylaxis to other categories of clean wounds should be limited to patients with two or more risk factors established by criteria in the study of the efficacy of nosocomial infection control (SENIC) because the baseline infection rate in these patients is high enough to justify their use. Cefazolin (or cefoxitin when anaerobic coverage is necessary) remains the mainstay of prophylactic therapy. Selection of an alternate agent should be based on specific contraindications, local infection control surveillance data, and the results of clinical trials. Newer criteria for determining the risk of "site infection" (wound and intracavitary) are in evolution and may lead to modification of these recommendations over the next several years.

Several antibiotics have been marketed for therapeutic use in intra-abdominal infection. Often, these agents do not provide a sufficient spectrum activity against both facultative and obligate anaerobic gram-negative organisms, or have certain toxic effects that would not otherwise support their use. Guidelines have been developed for selection of antibiotic therapy for intra-abdominal infections and are presented as a statement of the Surgical Infection Society endorsed by the Executive Council. These guidelines are restricted to infections derived from the gastrointestinal tract and deal with those microorganisms commonly seen in such infections. The recommendations are based on in vitro activity against enteric bacteria, experience in animal models, and documented efficacy in clinical trials. Other concerns regarding pharmacokinetics, mechanisms of action, microbial resistance, and safety were also used in the formation of these guidelines. For community-acquired infections of mild to moderate severity, single-agent therapy with cefoxitin, cefotetan, or cefmetazole or ticarcillin-clavulanic acid is recommended. For more severe infections, single-agent therapy with carbapenems (imipenem/cilastatin) or combination therapy with either a third-generation cephalosporin, a monobactam (aztreonam), or an aminoglycoside plus clindamycin or metronidazole is recommended. Regimens with little or no activity against facultative gram-negative rods or anaerobic gram-negative rods are not considered acceptable.

Nosocomial pneumonia (NP) is associated with a significant mortality, 66% in a previous retrospective study of NP complicating intra-abdominal sepsis (IAS). We prospectively compared the outcome of NP complicating IAS with that of recurrent IAS (R-IAS) in the absence of NP. Data were collected prospectively on 300 patients with IAS; 34 patients who presented with pneumonia were excluded from the analysis (44% mortality). One hundred seventy-one patients with no NP and no R-IAS (group 1) had a hospital mortality of 20% (34 patients); 36 without NP in whom R-IAS developed (group 2) had a 17% mortality (six patients); and 47 with NP but no R-IAS (group 3) had a 53% mortality (25 patients). Finally, 12 patients who had both NP and R-IAS suffered a 75% mortality (nine patients). We examined the relationships among the following putative risk factors and mortality: APACHE (acute physiology and chronic health evaluation) II score (at initial presentation with IAS), the need for mechanical ventilatory assistance following initial treatment for peritonitis, steroid requirement, generalized peritonitis vs abscess, and the need for surgical as opposed to percutaneous treatment. Using mortality as the dependent variable, group 2 vs 3 as the explanatory variable, and the risk factors as confounders, logistic regression analysis indicated that the group difference was significant after controlling for confounders. We conclude that NP complicating IAS is an independent risk factor associated with a significant mortality compared with R-IAS. These data challenge the notion that death in IAS is usually due to recurrent or persistent intra-abdominal infection.

A rat model was developed to determine if delayed hypersensitivity skin tests during early peritonitis would predict outcome. Presensitized rats were simultaneously tested intradermally with keyhole-limpet hemocyanin and given four types of fecal bacteria and 10% barium sulfate intraperitoneally. Rats were divided into four groups according to inoculum dose. Skin tests were read at 24 hours in survivors and correlated with death and abscesses during the next 19 days. In the two groups with greatest mortality, 35% of anergic rats died, compared with 0% of reactive rats. In the three groups with most abscesses, anergic rats had more abscesses than those that reacted. Overall, 90% of anergic rats died or had abscesses v only 10% of reactors. We concluded that the outcome of untreated peritonitis is determined in the first 24 hours; anergy at that time predicts death or abscess formation.

We studied 108 patients undergoing clean-contaminated and dirty surgical procedures to determine whether daily C-reactive protein (CRP) measurements for 14 days postoperatively could predict the occurrence of septic complications prior to clinical diagnosis. Diagnostic criteria for septic complications and positive CRP response were defined in advance of the study. The CRP assays were carried out using an automated laser nephelometer system after the patient's discharge from the hospital. Forty-six septic complications were diagnosed in 40 patients. These complications consisted of wound infection (23), urinary tract infection (11), pneumonia (six), upper respiratory tract infection (three), intra-abdominal abscess (one), and other (two). The CRP testing was found to have a positive predictive value of 69% and a negative predictive value of 78%. We conclude that serial CRP measurements may be a valuable adjunct to surgical care in patients at high risk of postoperative septic complications.

Generalized peritonitis was assessed in 176 patients, 67 (38%) of whom died. Cases were divided into causative groups: (1) appendicitis and perforated duodenal ulcer, (2) intraperitoneal origin other than appendix or duodenum, and (3) postoperative peritonitis. Mortalities were 10%, 50%, and 60%, respectively. Postoperative peritonitis was characterized by lack of influence of age on outcome, late operation, and more frequent organ failure. Delayed surgery carried a worse prognosis. Organ failure was a risk factor with 76% mortality, and was associated with late operation. Early surgery in organ failure improved survival. More sensitive indicators of early organ dysfunction might improve survival.

Therapeutic trials for intra-abdominal sepsis require pretreatment stratification; physiologic scoring has been recently proposed for this purpose. We have prospectively tested the validity of one such scoring system, namely, the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE II). As part of a larger database, we correlated APACHE II scores with mortality in 100 patients hospitalized for generalized peritonitis or abdominal abscess. Use of steroids was recorded because of our suspicion that steroids increase mortality but blunt the physiologic response to sepsis. Thirty-one patients died, including 12 of 19 patients receiving steroids. Stepwise discriminant analysis revealed that the APACHE II score and steroid use were each independently associated with the rate of mortality. We report a prospective validation of pretreatment APACHE II scoring in abdominal sepsis. Steroid use is an independent risk factor.