Airborne bacterial contamination during orthopedic surgery: A randomized controlled pilot trial.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Several factors such as lack of unidirectional, turbulent free laminar airflow, duration of surgery, patient warming system, or the number of health professionals in the OR have been shown or suspected to increase the number of airborne bacteria. The objective of this study was to perform a multivariate analysis of bacterial counts in the OR in patients during minor orthopedic surgery. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized pilot study. SETTING: Medical University of Vienna, Austria. PATIENTS: Eighty patients undergoing minor orthopedic surgery were included in the study. INTERVENTIONS: Surgery took place in ORs with and without a unidirectional turbulent free laminar airflow system, patients were randomized to warming with a forced air or an electric warming system. MEASUREMENT: The number of airborne bacteria was measured using sedimentation agar plates and nitrocellulose membranes at 6 standardized locations in the OR. MAIN RESULTS: The results of the multivariate analysis showed, that the absence of unidirectional turbulent free laminar airflow and longer duration of surgery increased bacterial counts significantly. The type of patient warming system and the number of health professionals had no significant influence on bacterial counts on any sampling site. CONCLUSION: ORs with unidirectional turbulent free laminar airflow, and a reduction of surgery time decreased the number of viable airborne bacteria. These factors may be particularly important in critical patients with a high risk for the development of surgical site infections.

Impact of different-sized laminar air flow versus no laminar air flow on bacterial counts in the operating room during orthopedic surgery.

BACKGROUND: This study investigated the influence of the size of unidirectional ceiling distribution systems on counts of viable microorganisms recovered at defined sites in operating room (ORs) and on instrument tables during orthopedic surgery. METHODS: We compared bacterial sedimentation during 80 orthopedic surgeries. A total of 19 surgeries were performed in ORs with a large (518 cm × 380 cm) unidirectional ceiling distribution (colloquially known as laminar air flow [LAF]) ventilation system, 21 procedures in ORs with a small (380 cm × 120 cm) LAF system, and 40 procedures in ORs with no LAF system. Bacterial sedimentation was evaluated using both settle plates and nitrocellulose membranes. RESULTS: Multivariate linear regression analysis revealed that the colony-forming unit count on nitrocellulose membranes positioned on the instrument table was significantly associated only with the size of the unidirectional LAF distribution system (P < .001), not with the duration of the surgical intervention (P = .753) or with the number of persons present during the surgical intervention (P = .291). CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that simply having an LAF ventilation system in place will not provide bacteria-free conditions at the surgical site and on the instrument table. In view of the limited number of procedures studied, our findings require confirmation and further investigations on the ideal, but affordable, size of LAF ventilation systems.

Resistive-polymer versus forced-air warming: comparable efficacy in orthopedic patients.

BACKGROUND: Several adverse consequences are caused by mild perioperative hypothermia. Maintaining normothermia with patient warming systems, today mostly with forced air (FA), has thus become a standard procedure during anesthesia. Recently, a polymer-based resistive patient warming system was developed. We compared the efficacy of a widely distributed FA system with the resistive-polymer (RP) system in a prospective, randomized clinical study. METHODS: Eighty patients scheduled for orthopedic surgery were randomized to either FA warming (Bair Hugger warming blanket #522 and blower #750, Arizant, Eden Prairie, MN) or RP warming (Hot Dog Multi-Position Blanket and Hot Dog controller, Augustine Biomedical, Eden Prairie, MN). Core temperature, skin temperature (head, upper and lower arm, chest, abdomen, back, thigh, and calf), and room temperature (general and near the patient) were recorded continuously. RESULTS: After an initial decrease, core temperatures increased in both groups at comparable rates (FA: 0.33 degrees C/h +/- 0.34 degrees C/h; RP: 0.29 degrees C/h +/- 0.35 degrees C/h; P = 0.6). There was also no difference in the course of mean skin and mean body (core) temperature. FA warming increased the environment close to the patient (the workplace of anesthesiologists and surgeons) more than RP warming (24.4 degrees C +/- 5.2 degrees C for FA vs 22.6 degrees C +/- 1.9 degrees C for RP at 30 minutes; P(AUC) <0.01). CONCLUSION: RP warming performed as efficiently as FA warming in patients undergoing orthopedic surgery.