Usman Ali M Syed1,2,3,4,5, Adam J Seidl1,2,3,4,5, Ryan A Hoffman1,2,3,4,5, Justin Bianchini1,2,3,4,5, Pedro K Beredjiklian1,2,3,4,5, Joseph A Abboud1,2,3,4,5. 1. Shoulder and Elbow Division, The Rothman Institute, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 2. Department of Orthopedics, University of Colorado, USA. 3. Medical Student, Drexel University College of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA. 4. Department of Biomedical Engineering, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 5. Division of Hand Surgery Rothman Institute, Sidney Kimmel Medical College at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Surgical site infection (SSI) remains a concern in shoulder surgery, especially during arthroplasty. While many studies have explored the characteristics and efficacy of different sterilizing solutions, no study has evaluated the method of application. The purpose of this study was to compare two popular pre-surgical preparatory applications (two 4 x 4 cm gauze sponges and applicator stick) in their ability to cover the skin of the shoulder. METHODS: Two orthopedic surgeons simulated the standard pre-surgical skin preparation on 22 shoulders of volunteer subjects. Each surgeon alternated between an applicator stick and two sterile 4x4 cm gauze sponges. Skin preparation was performed with a commercially available solution that can be illuminated under UV-A light. Advanced image-analysis software was utilized to determine un-prepped areas. A two-tailed paired t-test was performed to compare percentage of un-prepped skin. RESULTS: The applicator stick method resulted in a significantly higher percentage of un-prepped skin (27.25%, Range 10-49.3) than the gauze sponge method (15.37%, Range 5-32.8, P=0.002). Based on image evaluation, most un-prepped areas were present around the axilla. CONCLUSION: Based on our findings, the use of simple gauze sponges for pre-surgical preparatory application of sterilization solution may result in a lower percent of un-prepped skin than commercially available applicator stick. Orthopaedic surgeons and operating room staff should be careful during the pre-surgical sterile preparation of the shoulder, especially the region around the axilla, in order to reduce the potential risk of surgical site infection.Level of evidence: III.
BACKGROUND: Surgical site infection (SSI) remains a concern in shoulder surgery, especially during arthroplasty. While many studies have explored the characteristics and efficacy of different sterilizing solutions, no study has evaluated the method of application. The purpose of this study was to compare two popular pre-surgical preparatory applications (two 4 x 4 cm gauze sponges and applicator stick) in their ability to cover the skin of the shoulder. METHODS: Two orthopedic surgeons simulated the standard pre-surgical skin preparation on 22 shoulders of volunteer subjects. Each surgeon alternated between an applicator stick and two sterile 4x4 cm gauze sponges. Skin preparation was performed with a commercially available solution that can be illuminated under UV-A light. Advanced image-analysis software was utilized to determine un-prepped areas. A two-tailed paired t-test was performed to compare percentage of un-prepped skin. RESULTS: The applicator stick method resulted in a significantly higher percentage of un-prepped skin (27.25%, Range 10-49.3) than the gauze sponge method (15.37%, Range 5-32.8, P=0.002). Based on image evaluation, most un-prepped areas were present around the axilla. CONCLUSION: Based on our findings, the use of simple gauze sponges for pre-surgical preparatory application of sterilization solution may result in a lower percent of un-prepped skin than commercially available applicator stick. Orthopaedic surgeons and operating room staff should be careful during the pre-surgical sterile preparation of the shoulder, especially the region around the axilla, in order to reduce the potential risk of surgical site infection.Level of evidence: III.
Authors: Christopher C Dodson; Edward V Craig; Frank A Cordasco; David M Dines; Joshua S Dines; Edward Dicarlo; Barry D Brause; Russell F Warren Journal: J Shoulder Elbow Surg Date: 2009-11-01 Impact factor: 3.019
Authors: Michael J Lee; Paul S Pottinger; Susan Butler-Wu; Roger E Bumgarner; Stacy M Russ; Frederick A Matsen Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2014-09-03 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: Jasvinder A Singh; John W Sperling; Cathy Schleck; William S Harmsen; Robert H Cofield Journal: J Shoulder Elbow Surg Date: 2012-04-18 Impact factor: 3.019
Authors: Michał Szpinda; Marcin Daroszewski; Anna Szpinda; Alina Woźniak; Marcin Wiśniewski; Celestyna Mila-Kierzenkowska; Mariusz Baumgart; Monika Paruszewska-Achtel Journal: Med Sci Monit Date: 2012-06
Authors: Hamidreza Yazdi; Alireza Yousof Gomrokchi; Ara Nazarian; Aron Lechtig; Philip Hanna; Mohammad Ghorbanhoseini Journal: Arch Bone Jt Surg Date: 2019-01