No abstract

No abstract

Surgical site infection (SSI) is one of the most common healthcare-associated infections (HAIs).SSIs are infections of the tissues, organs or spaces exposed by surgeons during performance of an invasive procedure. 1 SSIs accounts for about 38% of nosocomial infections, and are a significant source of post-operative morbidity. 2 They can occur anytime from zero to thirty days and affect either the incision or deep tissue at the operation site. 2 Data from the National Nosocomial Infection Surveillance [NNIS] system of CDC shows that of all SSIs, 47% are superficial, 23% are deep and 30% are organ/space. 3 The incidence of SSI in India ranges from 4.04 to 30%. 4 SSIs remain a significant clinical problem as they are associated with enhanced mortality and morbidity and impose socio economic burden on patients as well as health care resources. 5 SSI surveillance is integral to hospital infection control and quality improvement programs, with feedback of SSI rates being an important component of SSI reduction strategies. This study aimed at evaluating the incidence of SSI in our hospital and the preventive measures which are already practised for reducing the SSI rate in our hospital. The study was aimed to assess the patient related and procedure related risk factors i nfluencing development of SSI and pathogens associated with SSI and their drug resistance in a tertiary care centre. The SSI incidence rate and other information derived from this study can be used for further strengthening of the hospital infection control programmes and thus effectively reducing the morbidity and mortality caused by SSIs. 2. Materials & methods A descriptive study was conducted at a public tertiary care hospital in Puducherry after the approval of Institute Ethics Committe e. All Patients aged 18 years or above, who underwent either clean or clean-contaminated surgeries 1, 2, 3 in the departments of Surgery / Obstetrics & Gynecology / Orthopaedics, were enrolled for the study. Patients aged less than 18 years / patients with implants / patients who refused to give consent were excluded. Data from 242 patients was obtained using a structured proforma. Patients were followed up for 30 days after the surgery to identify any infection at the surgical site. Inpatient follow up was done in the ward & those who got discharged were followed up over the phone to identif y the presence of any infection. Diagnosis of infection was made according to the criteria established by the Centers for Disease Control (Atlanta) 6. Pus swabs or aspirate from incision wound discharge was sent to Microbiology department and samples were processed as per sta ndard guidelines in the microbiology laboratory. Antibiotic sensitivity testing was done according to CLSI guidelines 7. Microbiological investigations results were collected from the laboratory. A record of all samples received was maintained in the register that carries identi fication details and details of organism isolated along with its antibiotic sensitivity pattern for selected first line and seco...