Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T21:48:48.968Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Excess Length of Stay Attributable to Surgical Site Infection Following Hip Replacement: A Nested Case-Control Study

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 June 2016

Vicente Monge Jodra ,
Lourdes Sainz de los Terreros Soler ,
Cristina Díaz-Agero Pérez ,
Carmen María Saa Requejo  and
Nieves Plana Farrás
Vicente Monge Jodra*
Affiliation:
Servicio de Medicina Preventiva, Hospital Ramón y Cajal, Madrid, Spain
Lourdes Sainz de los Terreros Soler
Affiliation:
Servicio de Medicina Preventiva, Hospital Ramón y Cajal, Madrid, Spain
Cristina Díaz-Agero Pérez
Affiliation:
Servicio de Medicina Preventiva, Hospital Ramón y Cajal, Madrid, Spain
Carmen María Saa Requejo
Affiliation:
Servicio de Medicina Preventiva, Hospital Ramón y Cajal, Madrid, Spain
Nieves Plana Farrás
Affiliation:
Servicio de Medicina Preventiva, Hospital Ramón y Cajal, Madrid, Spain
*
Servicio de Medicina Preventiva, Hospital Ramón y Cajal, Carretera de Colmenar km 9, 1, Madrid 28034, Spain ([email protected])
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective.

We estimated the impact of hip replacement-associated surgical site infection (SSI) on morbidity and length of stay.

Methods.

This was a pairwise matched (1 : 1) case-control study nested in a cohort. All patients who underwent hip replacement from January 1, 2000, to June 30, 2004, were prospectively enrolled for the nested case-control design analysis and were monitored from the time of surgery until hospital discharge, including any patients readmitted because of infection.

Results.

Among the 1,260 hip replacements performed, 28 SSIs were detected, yielding a crude SSI rate of 2.2%. The median excess length of stay attributable to SSI was 32.5 days (P< .001), whereas the median prolonged postoperative stay due to SSI was 31 days (P< .001). Deep-wound SSI was the type that prolonged hospital stay the most (up to 49 days). Of the patients who developed an SSI, 4 required revision surgery, for an SSI-related morbidity rate of 14.3%.

Conclusion.

SSI prolongs hospital stay; however, although hospital stay is a rough indicator of the cost of this complication, to accurately estimate the costs of SSI, we would need to consider individual costs in a linear regression model adjusted for all possible confounding factors.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 27 , Issue 12 , December 2006 , pp. 1299 - 1303
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Smyth, ETM, Emmerson, AM. Surgical site infection surveillance. J Hosp Infect 2000; 45:173–184.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2. Peersman, G, Laskin, R, Davis, J, Peterson, M. Infection in total knee replacement: a retrospective review of 6489 total knee replacements. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2001; 392:15–23.Google Scholar
3. Sands, K, Vineyard, G, Platt, R. Surgical site infections occurring after hospital discharge. J Infect Dis 1996; 173:963–970.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4. Kirkland, KB, Briggs, JP, Trivette, SL, Wilkinson, WE, Sexton, DJ. The impact of surgical-site infections in the 1990s: attributable mortality, excess length of hospitalisation, and extra costs. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1999; 20:725–730.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5. Whitehouse, JD, Friedman, ND, Kirkland, KB, Richardson, WJ, Sexton, DJ. The impact of surgical-site infections following orthopaedic surgery at a community hospital and a university hospital: adverse quality of life, excess length of stay and extra cost. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2002; 23:183–189.Google Scholar
6. Mylotte, JM, Graham, R, Kahler, L, Young, L, Goodnough, S. Impact of nosocomial infection on length of stay and functional improvement among patients admitted to an acute rehabilitation unit. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2001; 22:83–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Hebert, CK, Williams, RE, Levy, RS, Barrack, RL. Cost of treating an infected total knee replacement. Clin Orthop 1996; 331:140–145.Google Scholar
8. Sculco, TP. The economic impact of infected joint arthroplasty. Orthopedics 1995; 18:871–873.Google ScholarPubMed
9. Saleh, K, Gafni, A, Gross, A, et al. Economic evaluations in the hip arthroplasty literature: lessons to be learned. J Arthroplasty 1999; 14:527–532.Google Scholar
10. Sanderson, PJ. Infection in orthopaedic implants. J Hosp Infect 1991; 19(Suppl A):367–375.Google Scholar
11. Fernández Arjona, M, Gómez-Sancha, F, Peinado Ibarra, F, Herruzo Cabrera, R. Risk infection factors in the total hip replacement. Eur J Epidemiol 1997; 13:443–446.Google Scholar
12. Schierholz, JM, Beuth, J. Implant infections: a haven for opportunistic bacteria. J Hosp Infect 2001; 49:87–93.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13. National CFHS. American Academy and American Association of Orthopaedic Surgeons—bulletin. AAOS 1999; 47:14.Google Scholar
14. Owens, WD, Felts, JA, Spitznagel, EL. ASA physical status: a study of consistency of ratings. Anesthesiology 1978; 49:239–243.Google Scholar
15. Keats, AS. The ASA classification of physical status—a recapitulation. Anesthesiology 1978; 49:233–236.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16. Culver, DH, Horan, TC, Gaynes, RO, et al. Surgical wound infection rates by wound class, operative procedure, and patient risk index: National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance System. Am J Med 1991; 91:152S–157S.Google Scholar
17. Mangram, AJ, Horan, TC, Pearson, ML, Silver, LC, Jarvis, WR. Guideline for prevention of surgical site infection, 1999. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1999; 20:250–278.Google Scholar
18. Horan, TC, Emori, TG. Definitions of key terms used in the NNIS System. Am J Infect Control 1997; 25:112–116.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
19. Horan, TC, Gaynes, RP, Martone, WJ, Jarvis, WR, Emori, TG. CDC definitions of nosocomial surgical site infections, 1992: modifications of CDC definitions of surgical wounds infections. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1992; 13:606–608.Google Scholar
20. Zoutman, D, Chau, L, Watterson, J, Mackenzie, T, Djurfeldt, M. A Canadian survey of prophylactic antibiotic use among hip-fracture patients. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1999; 20:752–755.Google Scholar
21. McLaws, ML, Taylor, PC. The Hospital Infection Standardised Surveillance (HISS) programme: analysis of a two-year pilot. J Hosp Infect 2003; 53:259–267.Google Scholar
22. National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance System. National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance (NNIS) System Report, data summary from January 1992 through June 2004, issued October 2004. Am J Infect Control 2004; 32:470–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23. Askarian, M, Gooran, NR. National Nosocomial Infection Surveillance System-based study in Iran: additional hospital stay attributable to nosocomial infections. Am J Infect Control 2003; 31:465–468.Google Scholar
24. Asensio, A, Monge, V, Lizán, M. Nosocomial infection in surgery wards: a controlled study of increased duration of hospital stays and direct cost of hospitalization. Eur J Epidemiol 1993; 9:504–510.Google Scholar
25. Plowman, R, Graves, N, Griffin, S, Roberts, JA, Swan, AV, Cookson, B, Taylor, L. The rate and cost of hospital-acquired infections occurring in patients admitted to selected specialties of a district general hospital in England and the national burden imposed. J Hosp Infect 2001; 47:198–209.Google Scholar
26. Hollenbeak, CS, Murphy, D, Dunagan, WC, Fraser, VJ. Nonrandom selection and the attributable cost of surgical-site infections. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2002; 23:177–182.Google Scholar