[1]刘 滨,韦 婵,唐玲利,等.脊柱手术5年信息化监测结果与感染特征分析[J].医学信息,2023,36(07):74-78.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2023.07.013]
　LIU Bin,WEI Chan,TANG Ling-li,et al.Analysis of 5-year Information Monitoring Results and Infection Characteristics of Spinal Surgery[J].Journal of Medical Information,2023,36(07):74-78.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2023.07.013]
点击复制

脊柱手术5年信息化监测结果与感染特征分析()
分享到：

医学信息[ISSN:1006-1959/CN:61-1278/R]

卷:
36卷
期数:
2023年07期
页码:
74-78
栏目:
医学数据科学
出版日期:
2023-04-01

文章信息/Info

Title:
Analysis of 5-year Information Monitoring Results and Infection Characteristics of Spinal Surgery
文章编号:
1006-1959（2023）07-0074-05
作者:
刘 滨; 韦 婵; 唐玲利; 等
（柳州市工人医院感染管理科，广西 柳州 545005）
Author(s):
LIU Bin; WEI Chan; TANG Ling-li; et al.
(Department of Infection Management,Liuzhou Workers’ Hospital,Liuzhou 545005,Guangxi,China)
关键词:
脊柱手术; 手术部位感染; 术后感染时间; 医生感染专率
Keywords:
Spine surgery; Surgical site infection; Postoperative infection time; Doctor infection rate
分类号:
R639
DOI:
10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2023.07.013
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
目的 分析SSI信息化监测结果及感染特征，为脊柱手术的SSI监测和预防提供理论依据。方法 对2017年9月-2022年8月于我院行脊柱手术患者进行SSI信息化目标性监测，分析SSI发生情况、病原菌培养结果及不同病区、医生感染手术专率。结果 共监测脊柱手术15 933例，发生SSI 151例，发生率为0.95%；表浅切口感染55例（36.42%），深部切口感染88例（58.28%）、器官腔隙感染8例（5.30%）；151例感染手术的75%分位手术时间为198.00 min，术后90 d内发生SSI 139例（92.05%）。151例SSI患者送检的切口分泌物中培养出阳性结果112例，主要以表皮葡萄球菌属、大肠埃希菌、金黄色葡萄球菌为主；各级手术NNIS感染率随着感染风险增加而逐渐增加，NNIS0级手术感染专率为1.05%，NNIS3级感染专率为10.00%，调整感染发病专率最高为脊柱二病区，最低为脊柱一病区，组间比较，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）；医生调整感染专率最高达到17.86%，最低为0，而手术例数最多的医生G感染专率为2.30%，各手术医生的感染专率存在差异。结论 通过信息化监测可有效获取脊柱手术SSI数据，多数SSI发生于术后90 d内，以表皮葡萄球菌属、大肠埃希菌、金黄色葡萄球菌为主；各病区、医生之间对手术SSI感染预防重视程度不同、医生手术技巧熟练程度不同导致其SSI发生率之间存在差异。
Abstract:
Objective To analyze the results of SSI information monitoring and infection characteristics, and to provide theoretical basis for SSI monitoring and prevention in spinal surgery.Methods SSI information targeted monitoring was performed on patients undergoing spinal surgery in our hospital from September 2017 to August 2022. The incidence of SSI, the results of pathogen culture and the rate of surgical infection in different wards and doctors were analyzed.Results A total of 15 933 cases of spinal surgery were monitored, and 151 cases of SSI occurred, with an incidence of 0.95%. There were 55 cases (36.42%) of superficial incision infection, 88 cases (58.28%) of deep incision infection and 8 cases (5.30%) of organ space infection. The 75% quantile operation time of 151 cases of infectious surgery was 198.00 min. SSI occurred in 139 cases (92.05%) within 90 days after operation. A total of 112 positive results were cultured from the incision secretions of 151 SSI patients, mainly Staphylococcus epidermidis, Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus. The infection rate of NNIS in all levels of surgery increased gradually with the increase of infection risk. The infection rate of NNIS0 was 1.05%, and the infection rate of NNIS3 was 10.00%. The highest adjusted infection rate was the second spinal ward, and the lowest was the first spinal ward. The difference between the groups was statistically significant (P<0.05). The highest adjusted infection rate of doctors was 17.86%, and the lowest was 0, while the infection rate of doctors with the largest number of surgical cases was 2.30%, and the infection rate of each surgeon was different.Conclusion SSI data of spinal surgery can be effectively obtained through information monitoring. Most SSI occurs within 90 days after surgery, mainly Staphylococcus epidermidis, Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus. There are differences in the incidence of SSI among different wards and doctors due to the different emphasis on the prevention of SSI infection and the different proficiency of doctors’ surgical skills.

参考文献/References:

[1]Edmiston CE Jr,Leaper DJ,Chitnis AS,et al.Risk and economic burden of surgical site infection following spinal fusion in adults[J].Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol,2023,44(1):88-95.[2]Dietz N,Sharma M,Adams S,et al.Health Care Utilization and Associated Economic Burden of Postoperative Surgical Site Infection after Spinal Surgery with Follow-Up of 24 Months[J].J Neurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurg,2023,84(1):21-29.[3]张晓虎,刘自明,马海珍.脊柱后路内固术式治疗后相关感染的高危因素及干预[J].宁夏医学杂志,2022,44(3):215-218.[4]Wang M,Xu L,Yang B,et al.Incidence,Management and Outcome of Delayed Deep Surgical Site Infection Following Spinal Deformity Surgery: 20-Year Experience at a Single Institution[J].Global Spine J,2022,12(6):1141-1150.[5]张瑛,闫宁,马同,等.脊柱术后手术部位感染危险因素巢式病例对照研究[J].甘肃中医药大学学报,2022,39(4):73-76.[6]中华人民共和国卫生部.医院感染诊断标准(试行)[J].中华医学杂志,2001,81(5):314-320.[7]南玲,刘丁.脊柱外科手术患者医院感染特征及危险因素分析[J].中国骨与关节杂志,2020,9(7):550-554.[8]Ying H,Luo ZW,Peng AF,et al.Incidences and reasons of postoperative surgical site infection after lumbar spinal surgery: a large population study[J].Eur Spine J,2022,31(2):482-488.[9]苍姗,张转运,荣辉.脊柱手术部位感染病原菌特征及危险因素调查分析[J].安徽医药,2021,25(5):879-882.[10]祁京,白艳玲,刘运喜,等.1629 例膝关节置换术信息化目标监测结果与假体周围感染的直接经济学负担分析[J].中华医院感染学杂志,2023,32(24):3758-3762.[11]Ojo OA,Owolabi BS,Oseni AW,et al.Surgical site infection in posterior spine surgery[J].Niger J Clin Pract,2016,19(6):821-826.[12]Dicks KV,Lewis SS,Durkin MJ,et al.Surveying the surveillance: surgical site infections excluded by the January 2013 updated surveillance definitions[J].Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol,2014,35(5):570-573.[13]de la Hera B,Sanchez-Mariscal F,Gomez-Rice A,et al.Deep surgical site infection following thoracolumbar instrumented spinal surgery.Ten years of experience[J].Rev Esp Cir Ortop Traumatol (Engl Ed),2019,63(4):300-306.[14]Long DR,Bryson-Cahn C,Pergamit R,et al.2021 Young Investigator Award Winner: Anatomic Gradients in the Microbiology of Spinal Fusion Surgical Site Infection and Resistance to Surgical Antimicrobial Prophylaxis[J].Spine (Phila Pa 1976),2021,46(3):143-151.[15]de la Hera B,Sánchez-Mariscal F,Gómez-Rice A,et al.Deep Surgical-Site Infection Following Thoracolumbar Instrumented Spinal Surgery: The Experience of 25 Years[J].Int J Spine Surg,2021,15(1):144-152.[16]刘春,朱超,臧雨峰,等.57例脊柱感染手术患者NGS检测分析[J].实用骨科杂志,2022,28(6):509-511.[17]Yudistira A,Asmiragani S,Imran AW,et al.Surgical Site Infection Management following Spinal Instrumentation Surgery: Implant Removal vs.Implant Retention: an Updated Systematical Review[J].Acta Inform Med,2022,30(2):115-120.[18]赵晋,陆天意,魏晓霞,等.基于WHO监测策略分析的清洁切口乳腺手术部位感染危险因素评价[J].实用肿瘤杂志,2022,37(4):333-338.[19]罗颖.髋膝关节置换术后手术部位感染的危险因素与预防措施分析[J].中国伤残医学,2021,29(15):90-92.[20]陈玉兰,林福军.骨科Ⅰ类手术切口感染目标监测与干预控制效果评价[J].中国消毒学杂志,2019,3(10):796-798.[21]Ban KA,Minei JP,Laronga C,et al.American College of Surgeons and Surgical Infection Society: Surgical Site Infection Guidelines, 2016 Update[J].J Am Coll Surg,2017,224(1):59-74.[22]Fuglestad MA,Tracey EL,Leinicke JA.Evidence-based Prevention of Surgical Site Infection[J].Surg Clin North Am,2021,101(6):951-966.[23]Zhu Y,Chen W,Qin S,et al.Surgeon volume and risk of deep surgical site infection following open reduction and internal fixation of closed ankle fracture[J].Int Wound J,2022,19(8):2136-2145.[24]Qin S,Zhu Y,Meng H,et al.Relationship between surgeon volume and the risk of deep surgical site infection (DSSI) following open reduction and internal fixation of displaced intra-articular calcaneal fracture[J].Int Wound J,2022,19(5):1092-1101.

相似文献/References:

[1]李灵玉,邹树芳,刘衍芮,等.脊柱术后早期静脉血栓栓塞危险因素的Meta分析[J].医学信息,2022,35(16):55.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2022.16.012]
　LI Ling-yu,ZOU Shu-fang,LIU Yan-rui,et al.Meta Analysis of Risk Factors for Early Venous Thromboembolism After Spinal Surgery[J].Journal of Medical Information,2022,35(07):55.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2022.16.012]

更新日期/Last Update: 1900-01-01