You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 122 No. 2, February 1987 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  PAPERS READ BEFORE THE 6TH ANNUAL MEETING OF THE SURGICAL INFECTION SOCIETY, CHICAGO, APRIL 21-22, 1986-PART II
 This Article
 •References
 •Full text PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (41)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Reducing Wound Infections

Improved Gown and Drape Barrier Performance

Joseph A. Moylan, MD; Kevin T. Fitzpatrick, PA; Kevan E. Davenport, PA

Arch Surg. 1987;122(2):152-157.


Abstract

• A 21-month study involving 2181 clean and clean-contaminated general surgical procedures was performed to evaluate the effectiveness of a commercially available disposable gown and drape system vs a cotton system in reducing wound infection. The series in which the disposable spun-laced fiber system was used had a significantly lower overall infection rate (2.83% vs 6.5%) as well as better rates in clean (1.8% vs 3.8%) and clean-contaminated (4.8% vs 11.4%) procedures. This effect was independent of all other factors. The odds of developing a wound infection was 21/2 times higher with a cotton system than with a disposable system. Actual cost analysis from three types of hospitals showed lower costs with utilization of disposable gown and drape systems. Hospital charges were significantly higher for those patients developing wound infections. The results of this study demonstrated not only significant reduction in wound infection rates but also major cost savings when a disposable gown and drape system was used in the operating room.

(Arch Surg 1987;122:152-157)



Author Affiliations

From the Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC.


Footnotes

Accepted for publication July 17, 1986.

Read before the Sixth Annual Meeting of the Surgical Infection Society, Chicago, April 22, 1986.

Reprint requests to Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Box 3947, Durham, NC 27710 (Dr Moylan).



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Instructional Course Lectures, The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons - Prevention of Deep Periprosthetic Joint Infection*{{dagger}}
HANSSEN et al.
JBJS 1996;78:458-71.
FULL TEXT  

Barrier Efficiency of Surgical Gowns: Are We Really Protected From Our Patients' Pathogens?
Smith and Nichols
Arch Surg 1991;126:756-763.
ABSTRACT  

Continuous, 10-Year Wound Infection Surveillance: Results, Advantages, and Unanswered Questions
Olson and Lee
Arch Surg 1990;125:794-803.
ABSTRACT  

Reducing Wound Infections: Gown and Drape Barriers
BELKIN
Arch Surg 1988;123:123-123.
ABSTRACT  

Reducing Wound Infections: Gown and Drape Barriers
RUNNELLS
Arch Surg 1988;123:122-123.
ABSTRACT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1987 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.