ABSTRACT
Background: Nosocomial infections caused by antibiotic-resistant pathogens demonstrate the continued need for preventive hygiene management strategies. Information and training of patients in their personal hygiene is a current requirement of the German Society for Hospital Hygiene, and is recommended by the Commission for Hospital Hygiene and Infection Prevention (Kommission für Krankenhaushygiene und Infektionsprävention beim Robert-Koch Institut, KRINKO) at the Robert Koch Institute. Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate patients' existing knowledge of hygiene and their motivation to actively participate in preventive hygiene measures. Methods: This study included 445 inpatients at the Polyclinic for Surgery of University Hospital Bonn. Subjects were interviewed over a 6-month period using a questionnaire comprising 21 questions on the topic of hygiene. Results: The majority of patients rated their subjective level of knowledge as intermediate (41%), 25% as poor and 35% as high. The respondents rated the active inclusion of patients in hygiene practices as highly relevant, and were willing to actively contribute to infection prevention, whereby the patients considered hand washing and hand disinfection in particular as important starting points. 78% of the respondents wanted more information on hygiene, particularly on wound and food hygiene. Targeted hygiene education provided by hospital staff had a positive effect on the patients' subjective level of information, as well as on their confidence in physicians and nursing staff. Previous information via television or radio had a negative impact on the patients' subjective information level and on their confidence in hospital staff. Conclusion: Most surgically treated patients are motivated to actively contribute to preventive hygiene measures. This represents an additional and important option for applying hospital hygiene more effectively and, above all, closer to the patient. Information and education should preferably be performed by healthcare professionals.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Laparoscopic surgery (LS) is gaining popularity worldwide because of benefits like faster recovery, earlier hospital discharge, and better cosmetic results. In hemophiliacs, surgery in general harbors an increased risk for severe complications. Whether LS or conventional surgery (CS) should be recommended in these patients is controversial and therefore the issue of our present study. METHODS: We performed a retrospective matched-pair analysis including laparoscopically operated non-hemophiliacs (LONH), laparoscopically operated hemophiliacs (LOH), and conventionally operated hemophiliacs (COH) concerning duration of surgery, drainages, hospital stay, complications, factor use (VIII, IX, and X), and blood values. Mann-Whitney U test was used (significance level P = 0.05). RESULTS: No significant differences were found in duration of surgery and drains in laparoscopically or conventionally operated hemophiliacs versus matched pairs. Complication rate did not differ among the different groups. Concerning the total duration of hospital stay (t-DHOS) and the postoperative duration of hospital stay (p-DHOS), there was no statistical difference between LOH versus matched LONH. However, in COH versus matched LOH, a longer time was required for preparation and recovery (t-DHOS, P = 0.04; p-DHOS, P < 0.001). Also, the median factor supply perioperatively including the day of surgery did not differ between laparoscopically versus conventionally operated hemophiliacs. CONCLUSIONS: Our study underscores the safety and benefits of laparoscopic procedures in hemophiliacs by showing a significantly shorter hospital stay for these patients resulting in reduced therapeutic costs and a faster mobilization. Still, the surgical and perioperative management of hemophiliacs continues to be a challenge requiring an experienced interdisciplinary team.
