How Sterile Are Our Operating Rooms? A Comparison of Air Quality During Primary TKA and THA

Gennaro DelliCarpini
{"title":"How Sterile Are Our Operating Rooms? A Comparison of Air Quality During Primary TKA and THA","authors":"Gennaro DelliCarpini","doi":"10.46889/josr.2023.4202","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Airborne Biologic Particles (ABPs) are a potential risk factor for infection following total joint arthroplasty. Factors such as temperature and humidity may affect the number of ABPs which can increase the risk of infection. Comparisons of ABP count between Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA) and Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA) have yet to be made. Our study examines the differences in ABP count between primary THA and TKA procedures.\n\nMethods: We analyzed all primary TJA procedures done within the same OR at an academic institution from April 2019 to June 2020. All procedures between the dates of March 15, 2020 – May 4, 2020 were excluded to avoid COVID-related confounding. Intraoperative measurements of temperature, humidity, and ABP count per minute were recorded. A report containing surgical data from the same time was generated using the institution’s Electronic Health Records (EHR) system and cross-referenced to the intraoperative measurements using procedure start and end times. ABP was calculated as an average ABP count per minute. Descriptive statistics were used to evaluate differences in variables of interest. P-values were calculated using t-test for continuous variables and chi square for categorical values.\n\nResults: A total of 168 cases were included in the study, comprised of 98 (58.3%) primary THA and 70 (41.7%) primary TKA. No significant differences in room temperature or particle counts across all particle sizes were found between THA and TKA groups. Similarly, time spent in the room was not significantly different between THA and TKA. The only variable that was significantly different between the two groups was average relative humidity, with higher humidity in the THA group (46.9% + 7.56 vs 44.4% + 8.02, p=0.008). \n\nConclusion: There were no significant differences in temperature or particle count between primary THA and primary TKA procedures, suggesting OR air quality was similar between the two procedure types. Further investigation including additional variables such as OR size, airflow patterns, and different procedure types should be performed to better characterize the role of ABPs in air quality and infection risk.","PeriodicalId":382112,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Orthopaedic Science and Research","volume":"113 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Orthopaedic Science and Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.46889/josr.2023.4202","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: Airborne Biologic Particles (ABPs) are a potential risk factor for infection following total joint arthroplasty. Factors such as temperature and humidity may affect the number of ABPs which can increase the risk of infection. Comparisons of ABP count between Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA) and Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA) have yet to be made. Our study examines the differences in ABP count between primary THA and TKA procedures. Methods: We analyzed all primary TJA procedures done within the same OR at an academic institution from April 2019 to June 2020. All procedures between the dates of March 15, 2020 – May 4, 2020 were excluded to avoid COVID-related confounding. Intraoperative measurements of temperature, humidity, and ABP count per minute were recorded. A report containing surgical data from the same time was generated using the institution’s Electronic Health Records (EHR) system and cross-referenced to the intraoperative measurements using procedure start and end times. ABP was calculated as an average ABP count per minute. Descriptive statistics were used to evaluate differences in variables of interest. P-values were calculated using t-test for continuous variables and chi square for categorical values. Results: A total of 168 cases were included in the study, comprised of 98 (58.3%) primary THA and 70 (41.7%) primary TKA. No significant differences in room temperature or particle counts across all particle sizes were found between THA and TKA groups. Similarly, time spent in the room was not significantly different between THA and TKA. The only variable that was significantly different between the two groups was average relative humidity, with higher humidity in the THA group (46.9% + 7.56 vs 44.4% + 8.02, p=0.008). Conclusion: There were no significant differences in temperature or particle count between primary THA and primary TKA procedures, suggesting OR air quality was similar between the two procedure types. Further investigation including additional variables such as OR size, airflow patterns, and different procedure types should be performed to better characterize the role of ABPs in air quality and infection risk.
我们的手术室有多无菌?初级TKA和THA期间空气质量的比较
简介:空气中的生物颗粒(ABPs)是全关节置换术后感染的潜在危险因素。温度和湿度等因素可能会影响ABPs的数量,从而增加感染的风险。全髋关节置换术(THA)和全膝关节置换术(TKA)之间ABP计数的比较尚未进行。我们的研究检查了原发性THA和TKA手术中ABP计数的差异。方法:我们分析了2019年4月至2020年6月在同一学术机构的同一手术室进行的所有初级TJA手术。排除2020年3月15日至2020年5月4日之间的所有手术,以避免与covid相关的混淆。记录术中温度、湿度和每分钟ABP计数。使用该机构的电子健康记录(EHR)系统生成包含同一时间手术数据的报告,并使用手术开始和结束时间交叉引用术中测量结果。ABP以每分钟平均ABP计数计算。描述性统计用于评估感兴趣变量的差异。对连续变量采用t检验,对分类值采用卡方法计算p值。结果:本研究共纳入168例,其中原发性THA 98例(58.3%),原发性TKA 70例(41.7%)。在THA组和TKA组之间,室温和所有颗粒大小的颗粒数没有显着差异。同样,在房间里花费的时间在THA和TKA之间没有显着差异。两组间唯一有显著差异的变量是平均相对湿度,THA组的平均相对湿度更高(46.9% + 7.56 vs 44.4% + 8.02, p=0.008)。结论:原发性全髋关节置换术和原发性全髋关节置换术在温度和颗粒计数方面没有显著差异,表明两种手术类型的手术室空气质量相似。进一步的调查应包括其他变量,如手术室大小、气流模式和不同的手术类型,以更好地表征ABPs在空气质量和感染风险中的作用。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信