Impact of Preoperative Povidone Nasal Swab on the Incidence of Surgical Site Infection: An Observational Study.

IF 1.7 3区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Journal of Patient Safety Pub Date : 2025-08-01 Epub Date: 2025-05-20 DOI:10.1097/PTS.0000000000001348
Michael A Edwards, Anyull D Bohorquez Caballero, Amy Glasgow, Renee Whaley, Dorin Colibaseanu, Wendelyn Bosch, Talal M Dahab, Aaron C Spaulding
{"title":"Impact of Preoperative Povidone Nasal Swab on the Incidence of Surgical Site Infection: An Observational Study.","authors":"Michael A Edwards, Anyull D Bohorquez Caballero, Amy Glasgow, Renee Whaley, Dorin Colibaseanu, Wendelyn Bosch, Talal M Dahab, Aaron C Spaulding","doi":"10.1097/PTS.0000000000001348","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Surgical site infections (SSIs) are the most common hospital-acquired infections in the United States, of which methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureu s (MRSA) accounts for 43%. Preoperative povidone-iodine nasal swab (PNS) is considered an effective and cost-saving treatment for Staphylococcus aureu s decolonization. We aim to assess the impact of preoperative PNS on SSI incidence.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This retrospective observational study utilized elective surgical cases between January 1, 2018 and May 31, 2023, at a single academic medical center. The cohort was divided into PNS and no PNS groups. The cohort was propensity-matched, and Pearson χ 2 /Kruskal-Wallis tests were performed to compare group differences. Multivariable logistic regression was utilized to compare events between cohorts before and after matching. An alpha of <0.05 was considered significant.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 45,998 (22,999 per group) matched participants were evaluated. On multivariate regression, the non-PNS treatment group was associated with an increase in hospital overall SSI occurrence (OR: 1.48, P = 0.02) but not specifically in-hospital methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus SSI, MRSA-SSI, or any 30-day SSI ( P > 0.05). Compared with PNS treatment and prophylactic antibiotics, in-hospital SSI was higher in the absence of PNS treatment (OR: 1.83, P < 0.001), antibiotic (OR: 2.63, P < 0.001), or both (OR: 2.06, P < 0.01). Compared with PNS treatment plus prophylactic antibiotic, in-hospital MRSA-SSI was only higher in the absence of antibiotic (OR: 2.92, P < 0.01) treatment.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Preoperative treatment with PNS may reduce overall in-hospital SSI but has no independent impact on MRSA SSI.</p>","PeriodicalId":48901,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Patient Safety","volume":" ","pages":"348-355"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Patient Safety","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/PTS.0000000000001348","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/5/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Surgical site infections (SSIs) are the most common hospital-acquired infections in the United States, of which methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureu s (MRSA) accounts for 43%. Preoperative povidone-iodine nasal swab (PNS) is considered an effective and cost-saving treatment for Staphylococcus aureu s decolonization. We aim to assess the impact of preoperative PNS on SSI incidence.

Materials and methods: This retrospective observational study utilized elective surgical cases between January 1, 2018 and May 31, 2023, at a single academic medical center. The cohort was divided into PNS and no PNS groups. The cohort was propensity-matched, and Pearson χ 2 /Kruskal-Wallis tests were performed to compare group differences. Multivariable logistic regression was utilized to compare events between cohorts before and after matching. An alpha of <0.05 was considered significant.

Results: A total of 45,998 (22,999 per group) matched participants were evaluated. On multivariate regression, the non-PNS treatment group was associated with an increase in hospital overall SSI occurrence (OR: 1.48, P = 0.02) but not specifically in-hospital methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus SSI, MRSA-SSI, or any 30-day SSI ( P > 0.05). Compared with PNS treatment and prophylactic antibiotics, in-hospital SSI was higher in the absence of PNS treatment (OR: 1.83, P < 0.001), antibiotic (OR: 2.63, P < 0.001), or both (OR: 2.06, P < 0.01). Compared with PNS treatment plus prophylactic antibiotic, in-hospital MRSA-SSI was only higher in the absence of antibiotic (OR: 2.92, P < 0.01) treatment.

Conclusions: Preoperative treatment with PNS may reduce overall in-hospital SSI but has no independent impact on MRSA SSI.

术前使用聚维酮鼻拭子对手术部位感染发生率的影响:一项观察性研究。
目的:手术部位感染(ssi)是美国最常见的医院获得性感染,其中耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌(MRSA)占43%。术前用聚维酮碘鼻拭子(PNS)治疗金黄色葡萄球菌是一种有效且节省成本的治疗方法。我们的目的是评估术前PNS对SSI发生率的影响。材料和方法:本回顾性观察性研究使用了2018年1月1日至2023年5月31日在单个学术医疗中心进行的选择性手术病例。该队列分为PNS组和无PNS组。队列倾向匹配,采用Pearson χ2/Kruskal-Wallis检验比较组间差异。采用多变量logistic回归比较匹配前后队列间的事件。结果的alpha值:总共评估了45,998名(每组22,999名)匹配的参与者。在多因素回归中,非pns治疗组与医院整体SSI发生率增加相关(OR: 1.48, P= 0.02),但与院内甲氧西林敏感金黄色葡萄球菌SSI、MRSA-SSI或任何30天SSI无关(P < 0.05)。与PNS治疗和预防性抗生素治疗相比,不使用PNS治疗(OR: 1.83, P< 0.001)、不使用抗生素治疗(OR: 2.63, P< 0.001)或不使用抗生素治疗(OR: 2.06, P< 0.01)的住院SSI较高。与PNS治疗加预防性抗生素治疗相比,院内MRSA-SSI仅在未使用抗生素治疗时较高(OR: 2.92, P< 0.01)。结论:术前应用PNS治疗可降低院内整体SSI,但对MRSA SSI无独立影响。
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
Journal of Patient Safety
Journal of Patient Safety HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
13.60%
发文量
302
期刊介绍: Journal of Patient Safety (ISSN 1549-8417; online ISSN 1549-8425) is dedicated to presenting research advances and field applications in every area of patient safety. While Journal of Patient Safety has a research emphasis, it also publishes articles describing near-miss opportunities, system modifications that are barriers to error, and the impact of regulatory changes on healthcare delivery. This mix of research and real-world findings makes Journal of Patient Safety a valuable resource across the breadth of health professions and from bench to bedside.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信