Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31171966›Full record

ArticleAntimicrobial resistance and infection control2019

Gender-related risk factors for surgical site infections. Results from 10 years of surveillance in Germany.

Seven Johannes Sam Aghdassi, Christin Schröder, Petra Gastmeier

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Antimicrobial resistance and infection control, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

49 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Moving from prognostication to prevention of SSIs in LMICs.Trauma surgery & acute care open · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

3 authors.

Seven Johannes Sam AghdassiCharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Institute of Hygiene and Environmental Medicine, Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-8263-3455
Christin SchröderCharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Institute of Hygiene and Environmental Medicine, Berlin, Germany.
Petra GastmeierCharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Institute of Hygiene and Environmental Medicine, Berlin, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Surgical site infections (SSI) are among the most frequently occurring healthcare-associated infections worldwide. Various analyses to determine risk factors have been conducted in the past, generally attributing a higher SSI-risk to male patients. However, when focusing on specific procedures, this is not always true. Our objective was to identify for which procedures male or female sex represents an independent risk factor for SSI and which parameters may explain these differences. Methods: We used the database of surgical procedures from the German national nosocomial infection surveillance system. We included procedures conducted between 2008 and 2017. We excluded procedures solely executed for one sex (e.g. mastectomy) and procedures with 20,000 or fewer operations. The observed outcome was the occurrence of SSI. All models were adjusted for confounders, which were eliminated with backward selection. The following factors were included in the analysis: age, ASA score, wound contamination class, duration of surgery, and season. All models contained the investigated factor sex. Results: Sixteen procedure types with 1,266,782 individual procedures and 18,824 SSI were included. Overall, the incidence rate ratio and the adjusted odds ratio for SSI were significantly higher for male patients. The included individual procedures were grouped into five surgical categories. For orthopedics and traumatology as well as abdominal surgery, SSI-rates were significantly higher for male patients. For heart and vascular surgery, SSI-rates were significantly higher for female patients. Other included surgical categories and individual procedures yielded diverse results. Similar results were found when solely analyzing deep and organ-space SSI. Multivariable analysis for attributable gender-related risk factors revealed differences with regard to underlying risk factors. Conclusions: SSI-rates differ by sex for certain procedures. When examining underlying risk factors, differences between male and female patients can be demonstrated. Our analysis considered a limited number of parameters, which were not sufficient to fully explain the observed differences. Further studies are required to obtain a more comprehensive understanding of the topic and to include gender-specific aspects into future SSI-prevention strategies.

Indexed as

Public Health SurveillanceSex FactorsAdultAgedCross InfectionDatabases, FactualFemaleGermanyHumansInfection ControlMaleMiddle AgedOdds RatioRisk FactorsSurgical Wound InfectionGenderHealthcare-associated infectionInfection controlSurgical site infectionSurveillance

Identifiers

PMID31171966
PMCPMC6547551

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.