[Skip to Content]
Sign In
Individual Sign In
Create an Account
Institutional Sign In
OpenAthens Shibboleth
[Skip to Content Landing]
Views 206
Citations 0
Comment & Response
March 4, 2020

Use of Disposable Perioperative Jackets and Surgical Site Infections—Reply

Author Affiliations
  • 1Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Plainview Hospital, Plainview, New York
  • 2Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, Hempstead, New York
JAMA Surg. Published online March 4, 2020. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2019.6380

In Reply We appreciate the dialogue that has been generated from our study1 because it shows the continued interest in providing optimal care for surgical patients. While we certainly acknowledge the difficulty with demonstrating efficacious infection reduction techniques, our position for evidence-based policies that are focused on improving patient outcomes, while minimizing financial and environmental burden remain.

Thomas highlighted the ambiguity of operating room policy regarding arm cover between countries. The lack of consensus on the topic stems from a need for quality scientific research regarding the subject matter. Preventing the devastating outcomes associated with surgical site infections (SSIs) should not be left up to guesses.

We acknowledge and commend the Association of Perioperative Registered Nurses for their continued focus in optimizing perioperative care and for modifying their guidelines in July 2019 prior to the publication of our study. However, the new guidelines raise similar concerns of waste without proven patient benefit. The updated recommendations are based off a single study by Markel et al2 that found a statistically significant reduction in airborne particle sizes when arms were covered with disposable sleeves while patients were undergoing preoperative skin preparation. Despite a reduction in particle sizes, there was not a significant difference in bacterial count and the settle plate colony-forming units. They did find a reduction in the bacterial genus Micrococcus vs coagulase negative Staphylococcus aureus and Corynebacterium; however, this genus of bacterium is unlikely to cause SSIs.2

Most causes of SSI are owing to the patient’s endogenous flora.3 Mundhada et al4 investigated the microbiology of SSIs of class 1 and 2 surgical wounds across multiple surgical subspecialties and found the most common bacteria isolated were S aureus (29%), Escherichia coli (21%), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (19%), Klebsiella pneumoniae (15%), Acinetobacter (12%) and Staphylococcus epidermidis (4%). Interestingly, there were no SSIs reported caused by Micrococcus,1,4 supporting the current stance in the literature that the association between airborne contaminants, bacteria, and SSI incidence has yet to be validated. In our opinion, the current recommendations will again lead to economic and environmental waste without patient benefit.

The resultant environmental burden following policy implementation in our study1 is certainly quite significant. The environmentally extended input-output Life Cycle Assessment model provided by Thiel et al showed an estimated 344 613 kg of carbon dioxide (or the equivalent of an additional 73 cars on the road) were produced as a result of the “Blue Jacket Policy.” This analysis provides excellent perspective for readers. The increased trash disposal also bears a financial cost, adding to the already enormous $1.7 million price tag that came with 2 years of disposable jacket use.

We believe our study is bigger than disposable jackets and infection prevention. It serves to call attention to the importance of evidence-based research prior to implementation of new policies, which will undoubtedly help reduce economic and environmental burden without compromising patient care.

Back to top
Article Information

Corresponding Author: Erik J. Stapleton, DO, MS, Northwell Health, 888 Old Country Rd, Plainview, NY 11803 (erik.stapleton1@gmail.com; estapleton2@northwell.edu).

Published Online: March 4, 2020. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2019.6380

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: None reported.

Additional Contributions: The authors would like to thank Jonathon Lentz, DO, for his invaluable contribution to this commentary.

References
1.
Stapleton  EJ, Frane  N, Lentz  JM,  et al.  Association of disposable perioperative jackets with surgical site infections in a large multicenter health care organization.  JAMA Surg. 2019;159(1):15-20. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2019.4085PubMedGoogle Scholar
2.
Markel  TA, Gormley  T, Greeley  D, Ostojic  J, Wagner  J.  Wearing long sleeves while prepping a patient in the operating room decreases airborne contaminants.  Am J Infect Control. 2018;46(4):369-374. Published online December 6, 2017. doi:10.1016/j.ajic.2017.10.016PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
3.
Reichman  DE, Greenberg  JA.  Reducing surgical site infections: a review.  Rev Obstet Gynecol. 2009;2(4):212-221.PubMedGoogle Scholar
4.
Mundhada  AS, Tenpe  S.  A study of organisms causing surgical site infections and their antimicrobial susceptibility in a tertiary care government hospital.  Indian J Pathol Microbiol. 2015;58(2):195-200. doi:10.4103/0377-4929.155313PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Limit 200 characters
Limit 25 characters
Conflicts of Interest Disclosure

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.

Limit 140 characters
Limit 3600 characters or approximately 600 words
    ×