ArticleAmerican journal of infection control2024
Automated traffic monitoring of neurosurgical operating room.
Article in American journal of infection control, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Fluorescent Marker Monitoring and Nurse-Led Feedback for Operating Room Environmental Cleaning: A Quasi-Experimental Single-Group Pre-Post Study.Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOperating room (OR) traffic disrupts airflow and increases particle count, which predisposes patients to surgical site infections, particularly in longer surgeries with hardware placement. The aim of this study is to evaluate the rate of traffic during neurosurgical procedures, as well as reasons for and perceptions of OR traffic.
methodsThis is a single-center, multimethod study monitoring neurosurgical OR traffic through direct observation, automated monitoring, and interviews. Traffic was observed between the skin incision and closure. Personal interviews with OR teams including surgeons, anesthesia, and nurses were conducted to evaluate their perceptions of the frequency of OR traffic and reasons for OR traffic.
resultsDirect observation reported OR door opening an average of 18 times, with 20 people entering or exiting per hour. The exact reason for traffic was not verified in all traffic cases and was able to be confirmed in only a third of the cases. Automated monitoring resulted in an average of 31 people entering or exiting the OR per hour. The procedure length was significantly associated with the number of people entering or exiting the OR per hour (P < .0001). Interviews highlighted that OR teams reported traffic to be significantly lower than observed and automated monitoring results, with approximately <6 people entering or exiting per hour.
conclusionsOR traffic is higher than staff expected, and updated processes are required to reduce the number of times the OR door opens. Implementing automated observation of OR traffic could reduce the OR traffic and the risk for surgical site infection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.