Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Economical saving due to prophylaxis in the prevention of surgical wound infection

  • Published:
European Journal of Epidemiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The objective was to know the principal risk factors that influence in the development of surgical would infection, and the economical saving achieved with the control of a single variable, that is, right prophylaxis. A prospective study was carried out at the Traumatology Department of La Paz Hospital. A total of 5260 patients operated during 1990–1993 are included. Active epidemiological surveillance was used to check patients; logistic regression was used in the multivariant analysis. The principal risk factors found were: immunodeficiency (OR = 8.67), incorrect healing (OR = 14.42), re-operated patient (patients who needed more than one surgical procedure while they are admitted; reoperations) (OR = 3.57), type of surgery (OR = 4.71) and wrong prophylaxis (OR = 6.36). Making constant all the variables except for prophylaxis, we calculated the percentage of infections prevented by a right prophylaxis, and the cost was calculated starting from the number of extra days of infection. The number of infections prevented during the four years was 310, saving a total of 194 million pesetas (1.5 million dollars), due to right prophylaxis. Cost-benefice ratio = 1/17. We consider of special importance to control this manipulable risk factor, in order to avoid the development of infections.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Haley RW. Infection surveillance and control programs. In: Bennett (ed), Hospital infections. Little Brown, Boston 1986; 39–51.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Ehrenkranz NJ, Meakins JL. Surgical infections. In: Bennett and Brachman (eds), Hospital infections. Little Brown, Boston 1992; 58–72.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Haley RW. Cost-benefit analysis of infection control programs. In: Bennett and Brachman (eds), Hospital infections. Little Brown, Boston 1994; 507–532.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Haley RW. Measuring the cost of nosocomial infections: Methods for estimating economic burden on the hospital. Am J Med 1991; 91: 32–37.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Broderick A, Morin M, Nettleman MD, et al. Nosocomial infection: Validation of surveillance and computer modeling to identify patients at risk. Am J Epidemiol 1990; 131: 734–742.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Cruse P. Surgical infections: Incisional wounds. In: Bennet and Brachman (eds), Hospital infections. Little Brown, Boston 1992; 423–436.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Comisión Clinica de infecciones del Hospital La Paz de Madrid. Normas recomendadas para la prevención y control de la infección hospitalaria. 1991.

  8. Gadner JS, Jarvis WR, Emori TG. CDC definitions for nosocomial infections. 1988. Am J Inf C 1988; 16: 128–140.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Hosmer DW, Lemmeshow S. Model-building strategies and methods for logistic regression. In Wiley Interscience editores. Applied logistic regression. 1990, 83–134.

  10. Kleinbaum DG, Kupper LL, Muller KE. Dummy variables in regression. In PWS-KENT edit. Applied regression analysis and others multivariable methods. Boston 1988; 260–296.

  11. Haley RW. Infection surveillance and control programs. In: Bennett (ed), Hospital infections. Little Brown, Boston 1985: 39–51.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Haley RW, Quade D, Freeman HE, et al. Study on the efficacy of nosocomial infection control program (SENIC PROYECT). Am J Epidemiol 1980; 111: 472–485.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Haley RW, Culver DH, Emori TG, et al. Progress report on the evaluation of the efficacy of infection surveillance and control programs. Am J Med 1981; 70: 971–975.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Wenzel P, Pfaller MA. Infection control: The premier quality assessment program in United States hospitals. Am J Med 1991; 91: 27–31.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Haley RW, Shachtman RH. The emergence of infection surveillance and control programs in US hospitals: An assessment, 1976. Am J Epidemiol 1980; 111: 472–485.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Tager IB, Ginsberg MB, Simchen E, et al. Rationale and methods for a standarwide prospective surveillance system for the identification and prevention of nosocomial infections. Rev Infec Dis 1981; 3: 683–693.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Evans RS, Burke JP, Classen DC, et al. Computerized identification of patient at high risk for hospital-acquired infection. AJIC 1992; 20: 4–10.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Wakefield DS, Helms CM, Massanari RM, et al. Cost of nosocomial infection: Relative contributions of laboratory, antibiotic, and per diem cost in serious Staphylococcus aureus infections. AJIC 1988; 16: 185–192.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Fernandez Arjona, M., Herruzo Cabrera, R., Gomez-Sancha, F. et al. Economical saving due to prophylaxis in the prevention of surgical wound infection. Eur J Epidemiol 12, 455–459 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00143996

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00143996

Key words

Navigation