Current surveillance and future priorities were not associated with SSI rate, volume, or cost to hospitals. The two highest contributors of SSIs and related costs have no (caesarean section) or limited (LBS) coverage by national surveillance.
Background
Despite a large literature on surgical site infection (SSI), the determinants of prevention behaviours in surgery remain poorly studied. Understanding key social and contextual components of surgical staff behaviour may help to design and implement infection control (IC) improvement interventions in surgery.
Methods
Qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted with surgeons (
n
= 8), nurses (
n
= 5) theatre personnel (
n
= 3), and other healthcare professionals involved in surgery (
n
= 4) in a 1500-bed acute care London hospital group. Participants were approached through established mailing lists and snowball sampling. Interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were coded and analysed thematically using a constant comparative approach.
Results
IC behaviour of surgical staff was governed by factors at individual, team, and wider hospital level. IC practices were linked to the perceived risk of harm caused by an SSI more than the development of an SSI alone. Many operating room participants saw SSI prevention as a team responsibility. The sense of ownership over SSI occurence was closely tied to how preventable staff perceived infections to be, with differences observed between clean and contaminated surgery. However, senior surgeons claimed personal accountability for rates despite feeling SSIs are often not preventable. Hierarchy impacted on behaviour in different ways depending on whether it was within or between professional categories. One particular knowledge gap highlighted was the lack of awareness regarding criteria for SSI diagnosis.
Conclusions
To influence IC behaviours in surgery, interventions need to consider the social team structure and shared ownership of the clinical outcome in order to increase the awareness in specialties where SSIs are not seen as serious complications.
Electronic supplementary material
The online version of this article (10.1186/s13756-019-0565-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) is a major complication of preterm birth that leads to lifelong respiratory morbidity. The EPICure study has investigated the longitudinal health outcomes of infants born extremely preterm (EP; <26 weeks gestation). Our aim was to characterise the airway microbiome in young adults born extremely preterm, with and without neonatal BPD, in comparison to matched term-born controls.Induced sputum was collected from 92 young adults aged 19 years (51 EP and 41 controls). Typical respiratory pathogens were detected using quantitative PCR. 16S rRNA gene sequencing was completed on 74 samples (29 EP with BPD; 9 EP without BPD; and 36 controls).The preterm group with BPD had the least diverse bacterial communities. The relative abundance of Bacteriodetes, particularly Prevotella melaninogenica was significantly lower in the preterm group compared to controls. This decline was balanced by a nonsignificant increase in Firmicutes. Total Prevotella relative abundance correlated with forced expiratory volume in 1 s z-score (ρ=0.272; p<0.05). Typical respiratory pathogen loads and prevalence were similar between groups.In conclusion, extremely preterm birth is associated with a significant dysbiosis in airway microbiome in young adulthood regardless of neonatal BPD status. This is characterised by a shift in the community composition away from Bacteriodetes as manifested in a significant drop in Prevotella relative abundance.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.