Introduction: For transurethral urologic surgery floor drainage is necessary for disposal of large amounts of fluid; for skin incision surgery floor drainage is unnecessary. The presence of floor drainage in an operating theatre may have a negative impact on the surgical site infection (SSI) rate after skin incision surgery due to aerosol contamination. We examined whether multifunctional use of an operating theatre would increase the SSI rate after skin incision surgery. Patients and Methods: Patients undergoing skin incision surgery on the kidney or prostate were prospectively divided into two groups with regard to operating theatre equipment. 272 patients were operated on in a theatre with floor drainage and 755 patients were operated on in a theatre without floor drainage. SSIs were categorized using the CDC classification and SSI rates in the two different theatres were determined. Results: No statistically significant difference (p = 0.86) in SSI rates after kidney and prostate surgery was found for operations in theatres with (2.6%) and without floor drainage (2.8%). Conclusions: Multifunctional use of an operating theatre with floor drainage for transurethral and skin incision surgery does not increase SSI rates. Thus, multifunctional use of theatres with floor drainage might lead to a gain in flexibility in the use of operating theatre capacity.

1.
Desenclos JC; RAISIN Working Group: RAISIN - a national programme for early warning, investigation and surveillance of healthcare-associated infection in France. Euro Surveill 2009;14.
2.
Kirkland KB, Briggs JP, Trivette SL, Wilkinson WE, Sexton DJ: The impact of surgical-site infections in the 1990s: attributable mortality, excess length of hospitalization, and extra costs. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1999;20:725-730.
3.
Broex EC, van Asselt AD, Bruggeman CA, van Tiel FH: Surgical site infections: how high are the costs? J Hosp Infect 2009;72:193-201.
4.
Brandt C, Sohr D, Behnke M, Daschner F, Ruden H, Gastmeier P: Reduction of surgical site infection rates associated with active surveillance. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2006;27:1347-1351.
5.
Astagneau P, L'Hériteau F, Daniel F, Parneix P, Venier AG, Malavaud S, Jarno P, Lejeune B, Savey A, Metzger MH, Bernet C, Fabry J, Rabaud C, Tronel H, Thiolet JM, Coignard B; ISO-RAISIN Steering Group: Reducing surgical site infection incidence through a network: results from the French ISO-RAISIN surveillance system. J Hosp Infect 2009;72:127-134.
6.
Denton B, Viapiano J, Vogl A: Optimization of surgery sequencing and scheduling decisions under uncertainty. Health Care Manag Sci 2007;10:13-24.
7.
Marjamaa RA, Torkki PM, Hirvensalo EJ, Kirvela OA: What is the best workflow for an operating room? A simulation study of five scenarios. Health Care Manag Sci 2009;12:142-146.
8.
Bleyl JU, Heller AR: Standard operating procedures and operating room management: improvement of patient safety and the efficiency of processes (in German). Wien Med Wochenschr 2008;158:595-602.
9.
Guerriero F, Guido R: Operational research in the management of the operating theatre: a survey. Health Care Manag Sci 2011;14:89-114.
10.
Berry A, Barratt A: Prophylactic antibiotic use in transurethral prostatic resection: a meta-analysis. J Urol 2002;167:571-577.
11.
van der Kooi TI, Manniën J, Wille JC, van Benthem BH: Prevalence of nosocomial infections in The Netherlands, 2007-2008: results of the first four national studies. J Hosp Infect 2010;75:168-172.
12.
Wendt C: Compliance with infection control guidelines (in German). Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz 2004;47:329-333.
13.
Mangram AJ, Horan TC, Pearson ML, Silver LC, Jarvis WR: Guideline for prevention of surgical site infection, 1999. Hospital Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1999;20:250-278; quiz 279-280.
14.
Tewari A, Sooriakumaran P, Bloch DA, Seshadri-Kreaden U, Hebert AE, Wiklund P: Positive surgical margin and perioperative complication rates of primary surgical treatments for prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing retropubic, laparoscopic, and robotic prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2012;62:1-15.
15.
Montgomery JS, Johnston WK 3rd, Wolf JS Jr: Wound complications after hand assisted laparoscopic surgery. J Urol 2005;174:2226-2230.
16.
Zhang B, Wu G, Chen C, Song B, Li X, Zhong L, Wang H: Combination of channel-TURP and ILC versus standard TURP or ILC for elderly with benign prostatic hyperplasia: a randomized prospective trial. Urol Int 2011;87:392-399.
17.
Wagenlehner FM, Wagenlehner C, Schinzel S, Naber KG: Prospective, randomized, multicentric, open, comparative study on the efficacy of a prophylactic single dose of 500 mg levofloxacin versus 1,920 mg trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole versus a control group in patients undergoing TUR of the prostate. Eur Urol 2005;47:549-556.
18.
Yamamichi F, Shigemura K, Matsumoto M, Nakano Y, Tanaka K, Arakawa S, Fujisawa M: Relationship between urinary tract infection categorization and pathogens' antimicrobial susceptibilities. Urol Int 2012;88:198-208.
19.
Reilly J, Allardice G, Bruce J, Hill R, McCoubrey J: Procedure-specific surgical site infection rates and postdischarge surveillance in Scotland. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2006;27:1318-1323.
20.
McHugh SM, Hill AD, Humphreys H: Intraoperative technique as a factor in the prevention of surgical site infection. J Hosp Infect 2011;78:1-4.
21.
Stepaniak PS, Mannaerts GH, de Quelerij M, de Vries G: The effect of the operating room coordinator's risk appreciation on operating room efficiency. Anesth Analg 2009;108:1249-1256.
22.
Berry M, Berry-Stolzle T, Schleppers A: Operating room management and operating room productivity: the case of Germany. Health Care Manag Sci 2008;11:228-239.
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.