Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T23:59:10.388Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Downward Trends in Surgical Site and Urinary Tract Infections After Cesarean Delivery in a French Surveillance Network, 1997–2003

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Agnès Vincent ,
Louis Ayzac ,
Raphaële Girard ,
Emmanuelle Caillat-Vallet ,
Catherine Chapuis ,
Florence Depaix ,
Anne-Marie Dumas ,
Chantal Gignoux ,
Catherine Haond  and
Joëlle Lafarge-Leboucher
...Show all authors
Agnès Vincent*
Affiliation:
Centre de Coordination de la Lutte contre les Infections Nosocomiales Sud-Est, University Hospital, Lyon, France
Louis Ayzac
Affiliation:
Centre de Coordination de la Lutte contre les Infections Nosocomiales Sud-Est, University Hospital, Lyon, France
Raphaële Girard
Affiliation:
University Hospital, Saint Genis Laval, and Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology, University Hospital, Lyon, France
Emmanuelle Caillat-Vallet
Affiliation:
Centre de Coordination de la Lutte contre les Infections Nosocomiales Sud-Est, University Hospital, Lyon, France
Catherine Chapuis
Affiliation:
Department of Infection Control Rhône Sud, University Hospital, Lyon, France
Florence Depaix
Affiliation:
Department of Infection Control Rhône Sud, University Hospital, Lyon, France
Anne-Marie Dumas
Affiliation:
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital, Lyon, France
Chantal Gignoux
Affiliation:
University Hospital, Pierre Bénite, and the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital, Lyon, France
Catherine Haond
Affiliation:
Department of Infection Control Rhône Centre, University Hospital, Lyon, France
Joëlle Lafarge-Leboucher
Affiliation:
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital, Lyon, France
Carine Launay
Affiliation:
University Hospital, Pierre Bénite, and the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital, Lyon, France
Françoise Tissot-Guerraz
Affiliation:
Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology, University Hospital, Lyon, France
Jacques Fabry
Affiliation:
Centre de Coordination de la Lutte contre les Infections Nosocomiales Sud-Est, University Hospital, Lyon, France
*
Centre de Coordination de la Lutte contre les Infections Nosocomiales Sud-Est, Villa Alice, Hôpital Henry Gabrielle, 20 route de Vourles, BP 57, 69530 Saint Genis Laval Cedex, France ([email protected])
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective.

To evaluate whether the adjusted rates of surgical site infection (SSI) and urinary tract infection (UTI) after cesarean delivery decrease in maternity units that perform active healthcare-associated infection surveillance.

Design.

Trend analysis by means of multiple logistic regression.

Setting.

A total of 80 maternity units participating in the Mater Sud-Est surveillance network.

Patients.

A total of 37,074 cesarean deliveries were included in the surveillance from January 1, 1997, through December 31, 2003.

Methods.

We used a logistic regression model to estimate risk-adjusted post–cesarean delivery infection odds ratios. The variables included were the maternity units' annual rate of operative procedures, the level of dispensed neonatal care, the year of delivery, maternal risk factors, and the characteristics of cesarean delivery. The trend of risk-adjusted odds ratios for SSI and UTI during the study period was studied by linear regression.

Results.

The crude rates of SSI and UTI after cesarean delivery were 1.5% (571 of 37,074 patients) and 1.8% (685 of 37,074 patients), respectively. During the study period, the decrease in SSI and UTI adjusted odds ratios was statistically significant (R = −0.823 [P = .023] and R = −0.906 [P = .005], respectively).

Conclusion.

Reductions of 48% in the SSI rate and 52% in the UTI rate were observed in the maternity units. These unbiased trends could be related to progress in preventive practices as a result of the increased dissemination of national standards and a collaborative surveillance with benchmarking of rates.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 29 , Issue 3 , March 2008 , pp. 227 - 233
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Brandt, C, Sohr, D, Behnke, M, Daschner, F, Rüden, H, Gastmeier, P. Reduction of surgical site infection rates associated with active surveillance. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2006;27:1347–1351.Google Scholar
2.Bärwolff, S, Sohr, D, Geffers, C, et al.Reduction of surgical site infections after Caesarean delivery using surveillance. J Hosp Infect 2006;64:156–161.Google Scholar
3.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance (NNIS) system report, data summary from January 1992 through June 2004, issued October 2004. Am J Infect Control 2004;32:470–485.Google Scholar
4.Malavaud, S, Bou-Segonds, E, Berrebi, A, Castagno, R, Assouline, C, Connan, L. Determination of nosocomial infection incidence in mothers and new-borns during the early postpartum period [in French]. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris) 2003;32:169–174.Google Scholar
5.Van Ham, MA, Van Dongen, PW, Mulder, J. Maternal consequences of caesarean section: a retrospective study of intra-operative and postoperative maternal complications of caesarean section during a 10-year period. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1997;74:1–6.Google Scholar
6.Mead, P, Hess, S, Page, S. Prevention and control of nosocomial infections in obstetrics and gynecology. In: Wenzel, R, ed. Prevention and Control of Nosocomial Infections. 3rd ed. Baltimore, MD: Williams and Wilkins;1997:995–1016.Google Scholar
7.Tissot-Guerraz, F, Moussy, L, Agniel, F, et al.Hospital infection in the maternity department: 3 years of surveillance in 9,204 deliveries of which 1,333 were cesarean sections [in French]. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris) 1990;19:19–24.Google Scholar
8.Girard, R, Chemorin, C, Lafarge, J, et al.Diminution de l'incidence des infections nosocomiales au cours d'une surveillance en obstétrique. Med Hyg 1998;56:1864–1869.Google Scholar
9. Ministère de la Santé et de la Solidarité. Circulaire dh/eo 3 n°99-402 du 8 juillet 1999 relative à l'application de l'arrêté du ler avril 1999 fixant les indices de besoins nationaux afférents à la néonatologie et à la réanimation néonatale. Non paru au Journal Officiel 1999.Google Scholar
10.Donowitz, L. Infection in the newborn. In: Wenzel, R, ed. Prevention and Control of Nosocomial Infections. 2nd ed. Baltimore, MD: Williams and Wilkins; 1992:796–811.Google Scholar
11.Hagglund, L, Christensen, K, Christensen, P, Kamme, C. Risk factors in cesarean section infection. Obstet Gynecol 1983;62:145–150.Google Scholar
12.Ott, W. Primary cesarean section: factors related to postpartum infection. Obstet Gynecol 1981;57:171–176.Google ScholarPubMed
13.Garner, J, Jarvis, W, Emori, T, Hogan, T, Hughes, J. CDC definitions for nosocomial infections. Am J Infect Control 1988;16:128–140.Google Scholar
14.French Ministry of Health and French National Council of Infection Control. 100 recommandations pour la surveillance et la prévention des infections nosocomiales. 2nd ed. Paris; 1999.Google Scholar
15.Vincent-Boulétreau, A, Caillat-Vallet, E, Dumas, AM, et al.Changing medical practices and nosocomial infection rates in French maternity units from 1997 to 2000 [in French]. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris) 2005;34:128–136.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16.Joseph, KS, Young, DC, Dodds, L, et al.Changes in maternal characteristics and obstetric practice and recent increases in primary cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2003;102:791–800.Google Scholar
17.Couto, RC, Pedrosa, TM, Nogueira, JM, Gomes, DL, Neto, MF, Rezende, NA. Post-discharge surveillance and infection rates in obstetric patients. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 1998;61:227–231.Google Scholar
18.Johnson, A, Young, D, Reilly, J. Caesarean section surgical site infection surveillance. J Hosp Infect 2006;64:30–35.Google Scholar
19.Mitt, P, Lang, K, Aira, P, Maimemts, M. Surgical site infections following cesarean section in an Estonian university hospital: postdischarge surveillance and analysis of risk factors. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2005;26:449–454.Google Scholar
20.Mah, M, Pyper, A, Oni, G, Memish, Z. Impact of antibiotic prophylaxis on wound infection after cesarean section in a situation of expected higher risk. Am J Infect Control 2001;29:85–88.Google Scholar
21.Senanayake, H. Elective cesarean section without urethral catheterization. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 2005;31:32–37.Google Scholar
22.Leigh, D, Sedgwick, J, Dean, R. Post-operative urinary tract infection and wound infection in women undergoing caesarean section: a comparison of two study periods in 1985 and 1987. J Hosp Infect 1990;15:107–116.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
23.Barbut, F, Carbonne, B, Truchot, K, et al.Surgical site infections after cesarean section: results of a five-year prospective surveillance [in French]. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris) 2004;33:487–496.Google Scholar
24.Bailit, J, Garrett, J. Comparison of risk-adjustment methodologies for cesarean delivery rates. Obstet Gynecol 2003;102:45–51.Google Scholar
25.Takoudes, C, Weitzen, S, Slocum, J, Malee, M. Risk of cesarean wound complication in diabetic gestations. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004;191:958–963.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
26.Tran, T, Jamulitrat, S, Chongsuvivatwong, V, Geater, A. Risk factors for postcesarean surgical site infection. Obstet Gynecol 2000;95:367–371.Google Scholar
27.Sarsam, S, Elliott, J, Lam, K. Management of wound complication from cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol Surv 2005;60:462–473.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
28.Schneid-Kofman, N, Sheiner, E, Levy, A, Holcberg, G. Risk factors for wound infection following cesarean deliveries. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2005;90:10–15.Google Scholar
29.Schwartz, M, Wang, C, Eckert, L, Critchlow, C. Risk factors for urinary tract infection in the postpartum period. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999;181:547–553.Google Scholar
30.Gould, JB, Danielsen, B, Korst, LM, et al.Cesarean delivery rates and neonatal morbidity in a low-risk population. Obstet Gynecol 2004;104:11–19.Google Scholar
31.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Nosocomial infection rates for interhospital comparison: limitation and possible solutions. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1991;12:609–621.Google Scholar
32.NNIS System. National nosocomial infection surveillance system report, data summary from January 1992–June 2001, issued August 2001. Am J Infect Control 2001;29:404–421.Google Scholar
33.Haley, RW, Culver, DH, White, JW, et al.The efficacy of infection surveillance and control programs in preventing nosocomial infections in us hospitals. Am J Epidemiol 1985;121:182–205.Google Scholar
34.Gastmeier, P, Geffers, C, Brandt, C, et al.Effectiveness of a nationwide nosocomial infection surveillance system for reducing nosocomial infections. J Hosp Infect 2006;64:16–22.Google Scholar
35.Vanhems, P, Dumas, A, Berland, M, et al.Hospital acquired infections in French maternity units: trend noted in 2-year surveillance (1997-1998). J Hosp Infect 2000;45:334–335.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed