Trial reportEuropean journal of epidemiology1991
Surgical infections surveillance: results of a six-month incidence study in two Italian hospitals.
Trial report in European journal of epidemiology, 1991. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Surgical site infection - a European perspective of incidence and economic burden.International wound journal · 2004Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issuedMasini R [corrected to Masetti R]
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In a six-month incidence study of surgical wound infections (SWI) in two Italian hospitals, 1,019 surgical patients, in three general surgery wards, and 433 surgical patients in one orthopedics ward were studied. For the SWI surveillance, the DANOP-DATA system was used: this microcomputer program was developed by Danish authors and tested in a European multicenter study coordinated by the World Health Organization in 1989. Two Italian hospitals participated in the multicenter study. The overall infection rate was 1.2 per 100 operations in orthopedics and 4.9/100 in general surgery. The risk of infection increased with age (RR = 2.06; 95% CL = 1.20-3.53), wound class (RR = 3.38; 95% CL = 1.97-5.8), length of pre-operative stay (RR = 2.71; 95% CL = 1.54-4.74), and duration of operation (RR = 2.59; 95% CL = 1.48-4.54). The infection rates ranged from 3.7 to 7.3/100 among the three general surgery wards; this variability by ward was only partially explained by differences in the age distribution of in-patients, wound class, duration of operation and length of pre-operative stay. When all these risk factors were simultaneously taken into account using a logistic regression model, the odds radio, comparing one of the three general surgical wards with the other two, was still 2.29 (95% CL = 1.23-4.26). The observed variability can be attributed to differences, among the participating wards, in the case-mix of patients treated and/or to differences in the quality of infection control programs implemented.
Indexed as
Identifiers
1783058What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.