Surveillance of surgical site infections by surgeons: biased underreporting or useful epidemiological data?

Abstract

Surgical site infections (SSIs) significantly increase post-operative morbidity and mortality. SSI surveillance is an established monitoring tool and reduces SSI rates. The purpose of this study was to compare prospective in-hospital SSI surveillance (I) by the surgical staff and (II) additionally by an infection control team (ICT). The reference method (III) was defined by data generated by the surgical team, supplemented by the ICT and completed by post-discharge surveillance with a post-operative follow-up of one year representing the sum of all available resources. During 24 months, all consecutive inpatient procedures (N=6283) were prospectively recorded by the surgical staff until patients' discharge (I). SSI rates were compared with the surveillance performed by the ICT (II) and with the reference method (III). The overall SSI rate (reference method) was 4.7% (N=293), of which 187 (63.8%) were detected in-hospital and 106 (36.2%) after discharge. (I) The surgical staff detected 91/187 (48.7%) of in-hospital SSIs [91/293 (31.0%) of the reference], (II) the ICT an additional 96/187 (51.3%) during hospitalisation [96/293 (32.8%) of the reference]. Further cross-checking as performed in the visceral surgery department increased the surgeons' detection rate (I) to 59/105 (56.2%) of in-hospital SSIs [59/147 (40.1%) of the reference]. SSI surveillance by the surgical staff detects almost half of all in-hospital SSIs and has the potential to increase the detection rate by simple interventions such as cross-checking. Such a relatively inexpensive surveillance system is an option for hospitals without an ICT or for low risk surgical procedures. Moreover, trends in SSI rates can easily be detected, allowing early intervention.