Abstract

Procedure rooms (PRs) are increasingly used for hand surgeries, but few studies have directly compared surgical site infection (SSI) rates between the PR and operating room. We tested the hypothesis that procedure setting is not associated with an increased SSI incidence in the VA population.We identified carpal tunnel, trigger finger, and first dorsal compartment releases performed at our VA institution from 1999 to 2021 of which 717 were performed in the main operating room and 2,000 were performed in the PR. The incidence of SSI, defined as signs of wound infection within 60 days of the index procedure, which was treated with oral antibiotics, intravenous antibiotics, and/or operating room irrigation and debridement, was compared. We constructed a multivariable logistic regression analysis to assess the association between procedure setting and SSI incidence, adjusting for age, sex, procedure type, and comorbidities.Surgical site infection incidence was 55/2,000 (2.8%) in the PR cohort and 20/717 (2.8%) in the operating room cohort. In the PR cohort, five (0.3%) cases required hospitalization for intravenous antibiotics of which two (0.1%) cases required operating room irrigation and debridement. In the operating room cohort, two (0.3%) cases required hospitalization for intravenous antibiotics of which one (0.1%) case required operating room irrigation and debridement. All other SSIs were treated with oral antibiotics alone. The procedure setting was not independently associated with SSI (adjusted odds ratio, 0.84 [95% confidence interval, 0.49, 1.48]). The only risk factor for SSI was trigger finger release (odds ratio, 2.13 [95% confidence interval, 1.32, 3.48] compared with carpal tunnel release), which was independent of setting.Minor hand surgeries can be performed safely in the PR without an increased rate of SSI.Prognostic II.

View details for DOI 10.1016/j.jhsa.2023.03.001

View details for PubMedID 36973100