There are few topics that generate more heated debate than guidelines for appropriate surgical cap attire. Specifically, the recent point of contention is that the skull cap, for most people who wear it, leaves some hair uncovered, exposing patients to more bacterial shedding and potentially higher rates of surgical site infection (SSI). But the controversy has percolated into more than a patient-safety issue; it has become a platform for emotionally driven arguments, unflattering logic, and failed leadership by all parties. There is plenty of blame to go around and a silver lining in the attempted collaboration to resolve the controversy, but ultimately the pending resolution suffers from ambiguity and indecision. Before we look forward, we should start with a quick summary of the dispute.
Identify all potential conflicts of interest that might be relevant to your comment.
Conflicts of interest comprise financial interests, activities, and relationships within the past 3 years including but not limited to employment, affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria or payment, speaker's bureaus, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, donation of medical equipment, or patents planned, pending, or issued.
Err on the side of full disclosure.
If you have no conflicts of interest, check "No potential conflicts of interest" in the box below. The information will be posted with your response.
Not all submitted comments are published. Please see our commenting policy for details.
Petro CC, Rosen MJ. What Surgeons Need to Know About the Bouffant Scandal. JAMA Surg. 2019;154(11):989–990. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2019.2107
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: