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. 127 No. 1, January 1992 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  ARTICLE
 This Article
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in this journal

The necessity and efficiency of wound surveillance after discharge

J. A. Weigelt, D. Dryer and R. W. Haley
Department of Surgery, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas 75235-9031.

A surgical wound surveillance program followed up 16,453 consecutive patients from 1983 through 1988. Patients were followed up for 30 days after operation, and 516 (35%) of the surgical wound infections first became manifest after discharge. In-hospital surveillance alone would have estimated the surgical wound infection rate to be 5.8% when the true rate was 8.9%. Infections that occurred after discharge were more likely in clean operations, in shorter operations, in obese patients, and in nonalcoholic patients. The probability that infections would begin after discharge was inversely associated with the duration of postoperative stay in the hospital. Postdischarge follow-up of patients who previously have undergone surgery is necessary to avoid underestimated of the infection rates and biases related to known risk factors. The most efficient time to survey patients appears to be at 21 days after the operation, at which time 90% of surgical wound infections have occurred.

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Six Years of Surgical Wound Infection Surveillance at a Tertiary Care Center: Review of the Microbiologic and Epidemiological Aspects of 20,007 Wounds
Weiss III et al.
Arch Surg 1999;134:1041-1048.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1992 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.