Literature DB >> 25163689

Does the use of ultrasound affect contamination of musculoskeletal injections sites?

Thomas Sherman1, Joseph Ferguson, William Davis, Matthew Russo, Evan Argintar.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Therapeutic musculoskeletal injections require a clean or sterile skin preparation to minimize the risk of infections. Ultrasound guidance for this procedure requires the use of transmission gel in proximity to the injection site, and its effect on maintaining sterility is unknown. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We asked: (1) Does sterile ultrasound transmission gel increase skin contamination during therapeutic orthopaedic injections? (2) Does nonsterile gel application result in increased contamination? (3) Does a manufacturer-approved ultrasound probe disinfecting agent in the form of 17.2% isopropanol and 0.28% diisobutylphenoxyethoxyethyl dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride wipes adequately decontaminate the ultrasound transducer? (4) Does 70% isopropyl alcohol effectively decontaminate skin for administration of musculoskeletal injections?
METHODS: Twenty-six healthy volunteers in an outpatient orthopaedic clinical setting were recruited. The subjects' skin was prepared to simulate a therapeutic intraarticular shoulder injection under ultrasound guidance. Four skin swabs for culture from each subject were taken: one sample before preparation with isopropyl alcohol, one sample after skin preparation, one after simulated injection procedure with sterile ultrasound transmission gel using the transducer, and one after mock procedure with nonsterile ultrasound transmission gel. In addition, samples were taken from the nonsterile ultrasound transmission gel and the transducer for culture analysis. Aerobic and anaerobic cultures were incubated during a 5-day period for bacterial species identification.
RESULTS: Sterile ultrasound gel use results in an increase in skin contamination (odds ratio [OR], 9; 95% CI, 1.4-57.1; p=0.005). Compared with sterile gel use, application of nonsterile gel did not increase contamination proportion (OR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.8-1.7; p=0.56). All cultures from nonsterile gel were negative. None of the samples cultured directly from the ultrasound probe were positive for bacteria (0%). Skin preparation with 70% alcohol decreased the proportion of contamination when compared with unprepared skin (OR, 21.0; 95% CI, 3.1-142.2; p=0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Use of ultrasound probes and transmission gel results in greater contamination in simulated intraarticular injections of the shoulder. As such, sterile preparation of the entire injection field, including the adjacent skin where the gel and probe are applied, may be prudent. Future studies are needed to determine if such a preparation decreases contamination and thereby infection rates related to musculoskeletal injections. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, therapeutic study. See the Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25163689      PMCID: PMC4390947          DOI: 10.1007/s11999-014-3903-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res        ISSN: 0009-921X            Impact factor:   4.176


  26 in total

1.  US probes: risk of cross infection and ways to reduce it--comparison of cleaning methods.

Authors:  C Fowler; D McCracken
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  Dramatically increased musculoskeletal ultrasound utilization from 2000 to 2009, especially by podiatrists in private offices.

Authors:  Richard E Sharpe; Levon N Nazarian; Laurence Parker; Vijay M Rao; David C Levin
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 5.532

3.  An outbreak of achromobacter xylosoxidans associated with ultrasound gel used during transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy.

Authors:  Karen Olshtain-Pops; Colin Block; Violeta Temper; Carlos Hidalgo-Grass; Ilana Gross; Allon E Moses; Ofer N Gofrit; Shmuel Benenson
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2010-11-12       Impact factor: 7.450

4.  Injection-induced low-grade infection of the shoulder joint: preliminary results.

Authors:  Alberto G Schneeberger; Edward Yian; Wolfram Steens
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2012-06-17       Impact factor: 3.067

Review 5.  Local corticosteroid injection treatment in rheumatic disorders.

Authors:  R G Gray; J Tenenbaum; N L Gottlieb
Journal:  Semin Arthritis Rheum       Date:  1981-05       Impact factor: 5.532

6.  Septic arthritis of the shoulder in adults.

Authors:  B M Leslie; J M Harris; D Driscoll
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1989-12       Impact factor: 5.284

7.  A prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled study to evaluate the efficacy of intraarticular hyaluronic acid for osteoarthritis of the knee.

Authors:  Robert J Petrella; Michael Petrella
Journal:  J Rheumatol       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 4.666

8.  Burkholderia cepacia infections associated with intrinsically contaminated ultrasound gel: the role of microbial degradation of parabens.

Authors:  Jim Hutchinson; Wendy Runge; Mike Mulvey; Gail Norris; Marion Yetman; Nelly Valkova; Richard Villemur; Francois Lepine
Journal:  Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 3.254

9.  Injection-induced pyogenic arthritis of the shoulder joint.

Authors:  Yong Girl Rhee; Nam Su Cho; Byung Heum Kim; Jeong Han Ha
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2007-11-01       Impact factor: 3.019

10.  Clean versus sterile technique for common joint injections: a review from the physiatry perspective.

Authors:  Jennifer Baima; Zacharia Isaac
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2008-06
View more
  4 in total

1.  A cost-saving measure for ultrasound-guided musculoskeletal injections.

Authors:  Jennifer Murphy; Sharon McGarry; Anish Patel; A Mark Davies; Steven L James; Rajesh Botchu
Journal:  J Ultrasound       Date:  2018-04-07

2.  Ultrasound Diagnostic and Therapeutic Injections of the Hip and Groin.

Authors:  Phey Ming Yeap; Philip Robinson
Journal:  J Belg Soc Radiol       Date:  2017-12-16       Impact factor: 1.894

Review 3.  Sepsis, parenteral vaccination and skin disinfection.

Authors:  Ian F Cook
Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother       Date:  2016-06-13       Impact factor: 3.452

4.  Minimizing shoulder injury related to vaccine administration.

Authors:  Ian F Cook
Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother       Date:  2021-07-26       Impact factor: 3.452

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.