| Literature DB >> 23285189 |
Maria Luisa Cristina1, Anna Maria Spagnolo, Marina Sartini, Donatella Panatto, Roberto Gasparini, Paolo Orlando, Gianluca Ottria, Fernanda Perdelli.
Abstract
Several studies have proposed that the microbiological quality of the air in operating theatres be indirectly evaluated by means of particle counting, a technique derived from industrial clean-room technology standards, using airborne particle concentration as an index of microbial contamination. However, the relationship between particle counting and microbiological sampling has rarely been evaluated and demonstrated in operating theatres. The aim of the present study was to determine whether particle counting could predict microbiological contamination of the air in an operating theatre during 95 surgical arthroplasty procedures. This investigation was carried out over a period of three months in 2010 in an orthopedic operating theatre devoted exclusively to prosthetic surgery. During each procedure, the bacterial contamination of the air was determined by means of active sampling; at the same time, airborne particulate contamination was assessed throughout the entire procedure. On considering the total number of surgical operations, the mean value of the total bacterial load in the center of the operating theatre proved to be 35 CFU/m(3); the mean particle count was 4,194,569 no./m(3) for particles of diameter ≥0.5 µm and 13,519 no./m(3) for particles of diameter ≥5 µm. No significant differences emerged between the median values of the airborne microbial load recorded during the two types of procedure monitored. Particulates with a diameter of ≥0.5 µm were detected in statistically higher concentrations (p<0.001) during knee-replacement procedures. By contrast, particulates with a diameter of ≥5 µm displayed a statistically higher concentration during hip-replacement procedures (p<0.05). The results did not reveal any statistically significant correlation between microbial loads and particle counts for either of the particle diameters considered (≥0.5 µm and ≥5 µm). Consequently, microbiological monitoring remains the most suitable method of evaluating the quality of air in operating theatres.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2012 PMID: 23285189 PMCID: PMC3528722 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0052809
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Floor plan of the operating theater, showing the positions of the samplers.
Mean values, standard deviations (SD), minimum and maximum values, median and quartiles (Q1–Q3) of the total bacterial load (CFU/m3) and counts of particles (Sampler A) of diameter ≥0.5 µm and diameter ≥5 µm (no./m3) in all the procedures monitored and in each of the two types of procedure.
| Total airborne bacterial load (CFU/m3) | |||
| Hip replacement | Knee replacement | All procedures | |
|
| 35±16 | 34±11 | 35±15 |
|
| 10–70 | 20–45 | 10–70 |
|
| 35 | 40 | 40 |
|
| 25–40 | 22–45 | 25–45 |
|
| |||
|
|
|
| |
|
| 2,538,425±1,480,054 | 6,908,804±3,269,100 | 4,194,569±3,142,263 |
|
| 600,353–5,164,279 | 2,925,281–11,219,627 | 600,353–11,219,627 |
|
| 2,418,086 | 6,468,327 | 3,127,466 |
|
| 1,294,603–3,586,316 | 3,760,520–9,683,440 | 1,630,903–5,164,279 |
|
| |||
|
|
|
| |
|
| 13,915±3,592 | 12,868±3,488 | 13,519±3,571 |
|
| 5,879–19,756 | 8,352–17,764 | 5,879–19,756 |
|
| 14,520 | 12,207 | 14,520 |
|
| 12,657–16,608 | 9,926–16,046 | 11,500–16,608 |
Mean, standard deviation (SD), median and range of the values of procedure length (min), number of persons present in theatre, and door-opening rate (no./min) for all surgical procedures and for hip and knee replacements.
| All surgical procedures | ||
| Mean±SD | Median (range) | |
| Operation length (min) | 45±10 | 40 (35–70) |
| N° persons present | 8±1 | 7 (6–10) |
| Door-opening rate (no./min) | 0.20±0.03 | 0.20 (0.12–0.26) |
|
| ||
| Operation length (min) | 41±6 | 40 (35–50) |
| N° persons present | 8±1 | 8 (6–10) |
| Door-opening rate (no./min) | 0.20±0.03 | 0.20 (0.12–0.26) |
|
| ||
| Operation length (min) | 50±12 | 45 (40–70) |
| N° persons present | 6±1 | 6 (6–7) |
| Door-opening rate (no./min) | 0.20±0.04 | 0.18 (0.16–0.25) |
Figure 2Duration of use of the ultrasonic scalpel as a percentage of operating time, subdivided by type of procedure.
Spearman’s correlation coefficients (Rho) and significances (p) between the mean concentration of particulate measured by Sampler A (≥5 and ≥0.5 µm) and data on procedure duration (min), ultrasonic scalpel use, number of persons present in theatre and door-opening rates, referred to all procedures and broken down by procedure type (hip and knee replacement).
| Mean concentration of particulate ≥5 µm | Mean concentration of particulate ≥0.5 µm | |
| Procedure length (min)°° | rho = 0.1706; p = 0.0984 (*) | rho = 0.6865; |
| rho = 0.2418; p = 0.0650 (°) | rho = 0.1888; p = 0.1521 (°) | |
| rho = 0.1343; p = 0.4350 (§) | rho = 0.7622; | |
| % use of ultrasonic scalpel | rho = 0.1460; p = 0.1581 (*) | rho = 0.7082; |
| rho = 0.2347; p = 0.0736 (°) | rho = 0.8612; | |
| rho = 0.5881; | rho = 0.7933; | |
| N° persons present | rho = 0.2854; | rho = 0.1624; p = 0.1158 (*) |
| rho = 0.4723; | rho = 0.2104; p = 0.1097 (°) | |
| rho = 0.3199; p = 0.0571 (§) | rho = 0.1464; p = 0.3943 (§) | |
| Door-opening rate (no./min) | rho = 0.1184; p = 0.2530 (*) | rho = 0.0378; p = 0.7159 (*) |
| rho = 0.2418; p = 0.0650 (°) | rho = 0.0645; p = 0.6275 (°) | |
| rho = 0.6895; | rho = 0.1389; p = 0.4192 (§) |
°° skin - skin.
(*) all procedures.
(°) hip replacement.
(§) knee replacement.