ObjectiveTo analyze the relevant factors for surgical site infection. MethodsA total of 677 cases of surgery in one hospital from July 1 to December 31 in 2012 were surveyed (not including implant and cardiac intervention surgeries), which were divided into different groups according to the preoperative incision contamination level, and the postoperative healing of incisions were observed closely. After the patients were discharged, we investigated the situation of incisions by phone or periodic review, and forms were filled in on schedule. ResultsBy follow-up evaluation of the 677 cases, the incisions in 12 cases were infected and the infection rate was 1.77%. Polluted and infected (14.28%, 30.76%) incisions caused more infection than the clean and clean-polluted incisions (0.00%, 0.59%). The patients who stayed in hospital for 4 or more than 4 days before surgeries (infection rate was 4.55%) took more risk of infection than the patients whose preoperative time in hospital were 2-3 days (infection rate was 0.60%) and 1 or shorter than 1 day (0.68%). Perioperative use of antibiotics for longer than 72 hours will increase the risk of incision infection than those within 48 hours (7.69%, 0.00%; P=0.002). ConclusionSurgical site infection is related to the incision type. Shortening the preoperative in-hospital time will reduce the risk of infection. Long time use of antibiotics in perioperative period cannot prevent the postoperative infection effectively, but may increase the risk of infection.
Objective To explore the application effect of process optimization in perioperative venous access management. Methods A total of 205 general surgery patients in the Operating Room of Cheng Du Shang Jin Nan Fu Hospital, West China Hospital of Sichuan University from April to May 2018 were selected as the control group, and 205 general surgery patients from June to August 2018 were selected as the observation group. The traditional management process was used in the control group, and the process optimization management was performed in the observation group. The establishment of venous access and related complications between the two groups of patients, as well as the satisfaction of patients and staff before and after the process optimization were compared. Results There was no significant difference in gender, age, education level, operation type, anesthesia method, operation duration, or intraoperative intravenous infusion channels between the two groups of patients (P>0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in gender, age, educational background, job title, job nature, or working years of the staff participating in the satisfaction survey before and after the process optimization (P>0.05). The rate of repetitive venous puncture (15.61% vs. 58.05%) and the idelness ratio of the intraoperative indwelling needle approach (10.73% vs. 52.20%) in the observation group were lower than those of the control group, and the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of tube blockage, detubation, or phlebitis/exudation between the two groups (P>0.05). After process optimization, patient satisfaction (22.91±3.43 vs. 17.44±4.90) and staff satisfaction (28.17±2.56 vs. 20.65±3.71) were higher than before optimization, and the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05). Conclusions The process optimization of venous access management for perioperative patients can effectively reduce the rate of venous repeated venipuncture and the idelness ratio of the intraoperative indwelling needle approach, reduce invasive operations on patients, reduce the ineffective work of nurses, avoid the waste of medical resources such as manpower and materials, and improve the satisfaction of patients and staff. It is worthy of promotion and application.