Role of Prophylactics Antibiotics in Clean Head and Neck Surgery in a Tertiary Care Center of Nepal: A Prospective Comparative Study.

Q3 Medicine
Deepak Paudel, Anil Bikram Karki, Amod Shrestha
{"title":"Role of Prophylactics Antibiotics in Clean Head and Neck Surgery in a Tertiary Care Center of Nepal: A Prospective Comparative Study.","authors":"Deepak Paudel, Anil Bikram Karki, Amod Shrestha","doi":"10.33314/jnhrc.v22i01.4992","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Surgical site infections are well recognized complications of any surgical procedures. In head and neck surgeries, prophylactic antibiotics are commonly used to prevent Surgical site infections, in contaminated and clean contaminated procedures. Guidelines advised against routine antibiotics use in clean surgeries, but in our setting, non-compliance is frequent, resulting excessive antibiotics use. Objective of the study was to compare the Surgical site infections rate between prophylactics antibiotics group and no antibiotics group in clean head and neck surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>It was a prospective comparative study conducted at a tertiary care centre of eastern Nepal. Patients were assigned to two groups, one receiving prophylactic antibiotics and another receiving no antibiotics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of 131 patients, 66 received prophylactic antibiotics and 65 did not. Thyroidectomy was the most common surgery. The surgical site infection rate was 6.06% in antibiotic group and 7.69% in no antibiotic group, the difference was not significant (p=0.744). The risk reduction of surgical site infection with use of antibiotics was 0.0163 and number need to treat was calculated to be 61.35 About 3% of the patients who were administered antibiotics experienced adverse drug reactions. Factors, such as gender, amount of blood loss, smoking, placement of drains had no significant impact on Surgical site infections rate.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Prophylactics antibiotics does not offer substantial advantages in preventing surgical site infections and are not advised for such procedures. Moreover, their use increases the financial burden and risk of adverse drug reactions to the patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":16380,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Nepal Health Research Council","volume":"22 1","pages":"169-174"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Nepal Health Research Council","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33314/jnhrc.v22i01.4992","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Surgical site infections are well recognized complications of any surgical procedures. In head and neck surgeries, prophylactic antibiotics are commonly used to prevent Surgical site infections, in contaminated and clean contaminated procedures. Guidelines advised against routine antibiotics use in clean surgeries, but in our setting, non-compliance is frequent, resulting excessive antibiotics use. Objective of the study was to compare the Surgical site infections rate between prophylactics antibiotics group and no antibiotics group in clean head and neck surgery.

Methods: It was a prospective comparative study conducted at a tertiary care centre of eastern Nepal. Patients were assigned to two groups, one receiving prophylactic antibiotics and another receiving no antibiotics.

Results: Out of 131 patients, 66 received prophylactic antibiotics and 65 did not. Thyroidectomy was the most common surgery. The surgical site infection rate was 6.06% in antibiotic group and 7.69% in no antibiotic group, the difference was not significant (p=0.744). The risk reduction of surgical site infection with use of antibiotics was 0.0163 and number need to treat was calculated to be 61.35 About 3% of the patients who were administered antibiotics experienced adverse drug reactions. Factors, such as gender, amount of blood loss, smoking, placement of drains had no significant impact on Surgical site infections rate.

Conclusions: Prophylactics antibiotics does not offer substantial advantages in preventing surgical site infections and are not advised for such procedures. Moreover, their use increases the financial burden and risk of adverse drug reactions to the patients.

尼泊尔一家三级医疗中心的头颈部清洁手术中预防性抗生素的作用:前瞻性比较研究。
背景:手术部位感染是公认的外科手术并发症。在头颈部手术中,预防性抗生素通常用于预防手术部位感染,包括污染手术和清洁手术。指南建议在清洁手术中不要常规使用抗生素,但在我们的环境中,经常出现不遵守指南的情况,导致抗生素使用过量。本研究旨在比较头颈部清洁手术中预防性使用抗生素组和不使用抗生素组的手术部位感染率:这是一项前瞻性比较研究,在尼泊尔东部的一家三级医疗中心进行。患者被分为两组,一组接受预防性抗生素治疗,另一组不接受抗生素治疗:在 131 名患者中,66 人接受了预防性抗生素治疗,65 人未接受治疗。甲状腺切除术是最常见的手术。使用抗生素组的手术部位感染率为 6.06%,不使用抗生素组为 7.69%,差异不显著(P=0.744)。使用抗生素可降低手术部位感染的风险为 0.0163,计算出需要治疗的人数为 61.35。约有 3% 的患者在使用抗生素后出现药物不良反应。性别、失血量、吸烟、放置引流管等因素对手术部位感染率无明显影响:预防性抗生素在预防手术部位感染方面并无实质性优势,因此不建议在此类手术中使用。此外,使用抗生素还会增加患者的经济负担和药物不良反应的风险。
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
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
81
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊介绍: The journal publishes articles related to researches done in the field of biomedical sciences related to all the discipline of the medical sciences, medical education, public health, health care management, including ethical and social issues pertaining to health. The journal gives preference to clinically oriented studies over experimental and animal studies. The Journal would publish peer-reviewed original research papers, case reports, systematic reviews and meta-analysis. Editorial, Guest Editorial, Viewpoint and letter to the editor are solicited by the editorial board. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) regarding manuscript submission and processing at JNHRC.
×
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