Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28758616›Full record

ArticleInfection control and hospital epidemiology2017

Variable Case Detection and Many Unreported Cases of Surgical-Site Infection Following Colon Surgery and Abdominal Hysterectomy in a Statewide Validation.

Michael S Calderwood, Susan S Huang, Vicki Keller, Christina B Bruce, N Neely Kazerouni, Lynn Janssen

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Infection control and hospital epidemiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Michael S Calderwood1Section of Infectious Disease and International Health,Dartmouth Hitchcock Medical Center,Lebanon,New Hampshire.
Susan S Huang2Division of Infectious Diseases,University of California Irvine School of Medicine,Orange,California.
Vicki Keller3Healthcare-Associated Infections Program,California Department of Public Health,Richmond,California.
Christina B Bruce4Department of Population Medicine,Harvard Medical School and Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute,Boston,Massachusetts.
N Neely Kazerouni3Healthcare-Associated Infections Program,California Department of Public Health,Richmond,California.
Lynn Janssen3Healthcare-Associated Infections Program,California Department of Public Health,Richmond,California.
California Department of Public Health · USDartmouth–Hitchcock Medical Center · USHarvard University · USUniversity of California, Irvine · US

Funding

National Claims-Based Quality Measures for Surgical Site InfectionsR18HS021424 · AHRQ · HARVARD PILGRIM HEALTH CARE, INC. · PI PLATT, RICHARD · 2012 to 2016
$2.4M
AHRQ HHS R18 HS021424
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To assess hospital surgical-site infection (SSI) identification and reporting following colon surgery and abdominal hysterectomy via a statewide external validation METHODS Infection preventionists (IPs) from the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) performed on-site SSI validation for surgical procedures performed in hospitals that voluntarily participated. Validation involved chart review of SSI cases previously reported by hospitals plus review of patient records flagged for review by claims codes suggestive of SSI. We assessed the sensitivity of traditional surveillance and the added benefit of claims-based surveillance. We also evaluated the positive predictive value of claims-based surveillance (ie, workload efficiency). RESULTS Upon validation review, CDPH IPs identified 239 SSIs following colon surgery at 42 hospitals and 76 SSIs following abdominal hysterectomy at 34 hospitals. For colon surgery, traditional surveillance had a sensitivity of 50% (47% for deep incisional or organ/space [DI/OS] SSI), compared to 84% (88% for DI/OS SSI) for claims-based surveillance. For abdominal hysterectomy, traditional surveillance had a sensitivity of 68% (67% for DI/OS SSI) compared to 74% (78% for DI/OS SSI) for claims-based surveillance. Claims-based surveillance was also efficient, with 1 SSI identified for every 2 patients flagged for review who had undergone abdominal hysterectomy and for every 2.6 patients flagged for review who had undergone colon surgery. Overall, CDPH identified previously unreported SSIs in 74% of validation hospitals performing colon surgery and 35% of validation hospitals performing abdominal hysterectomy. CONCLUSIONS Claims-based surveillance is a standardized approach that hospitals can use to augment traditional surveillance methods and health departments can use for external validation. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2017;38:1091-1097.

Indexed as

AbdomenAnti-Bacterial AgentsCaliforniaClinical AuditColonCross InfectionDigestive System Surgical ProceduresDrug UtilizationHospitalsHumansHysterectomyInsurance Claim ReportingInternational Classification of DiseasesSensitivity and SpecificitySentinel SurveillanceSurgical Wound InfectionAnti-Bacterial Agents

Identifiers

PMID28758616
PMCPMC13043238
OpenAlexW2741110528

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.