Am J Infect Control, 2000 Apr;28(2):109-15
Autores:

Merle V, Germain JM, Chamouni P, Daubert H, Froment L, Michot F, Teniere P, Czernichow P.
Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, Rouen University Hospital-Charles Nicolle, Rouen, France

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: The accepted standard in estimating the stay prolongation attributable to surgical site infections is the matched-cohort study method (MCS), which is associated with selection bias. The Appropriateness Evaluation Protocol (AEP) has been used to estimate stay prolongation attributable to nosocomial infections but has not been validated specifically for surgical site infections.Aim of the Study: To compare estimates of stay prolongation attributable to surgical site infections after digestive surgery, obtained by AEP and by MCS.

METHODS: Sixty-five surgical site infections after digestive tract surgery were analyzed by AEP and MCS. AEP stay prolongation was the number of days judged specifically appropriate for the care of surgical site infections. MCS stay prolongation was the difference of stay duration in surgical site infection cases and two controls matched by age, sex, and diagnosis-related groups. Sensitivity and specificity of AEP, and agreement between both methods, were calculated.

RESULTS: The mean AEP stay prolongation was 3.5 days vs 7.2 days for MCS. The sensitivity of AEP was 58% and the specificity was 75%. The agreement between the two methods was poor.

CONCLUSION: Surgical site infections after digestive tract surgery increased the hospital stay. Accurate estimations of a prolongation of stay will vary according to the method selected.
Merle, V. ... [et al.]