FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 9000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Home / Equine Research Bank / Front Vet Sci / Use of Clinical Audits to Evaluate Timing of Preoperative An...
Frontiers in veterinary science2021; 8; 630111; doi: 10.3389/fvets.2021.630111

Use of Clinical Audits to Evaluate Timing of Preoperative Antimicrobials in Equine Surgery at a Veterinary Teaching Hospital.

Abstract: Based on human surgical guidelines, intravenous antimicrobials are recommended to be administered within 60 min of surgical incision. Achieving this target in horses is reportedly challenging and influenced by hospital policies. The objectives of this study were to evaluate and improve: (1) the timing of antimicrobial administration to surgical incision (tAB-INC), (2) contributions of anesthesia pre-induction (tPRI) and surgical preparation (tPREP) periods to tAB-INC, and the (3) completeness of antimicrobial recording. Two clinical audits were conducted before and after the policy changes (patient preparation and anesthesia record keeping). tPRI, tPREP, and tAB-INC were calculated and compared for elective arthroscopies and emergency laparotomies within and between the audits. The percentage of procedures with a tAB-INC <60 min was calculated. Antimicrobial recording was classified as complete or incomplete. A median tAB-INC <60 min was achieved in laparotomies (audit 1; 45 min, audit 2; 53 min) with a shorter tPREP than arthroscopies ( < 0.0001, both audits). The percentage of procedures with tAB-INC <60 min, tAB-INC, tPRI, and tPREP durations did not improve between the audits. There was a positive correlation between the number of operated joints and tPREP (audit 1, <0.001, = 0.77; audit 2, < 0.001, = 0.59). Between audits, antimicrobial recording significantly improved for elective arthroscopies (82-97%, = 0.008) but not emergency laparotomies (76-88%, = 0.2). Clinical audits successfully quantified the impact of introduced changes and their adherence to antimicrobial prophylaxis guidelines. Antimicrobial recording was improved but further policy changes are required to achieve a tAB-INC <60 min for arthroscopies.
Copyright © 2021 Ceriotti, Westerfeld, Bonilla and Pang.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2021-03-26 PubMed ID: 33842572PubMed Central: PMC8032889DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2021.630111Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
LinkedInCopy
  • Journal Article

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

The research evaluates and aims to improve the timing and recording of preoperative antimicrobial administration in equine surgery, employing clinical audits at a veterinary teaching hospital for the purpose. The audits succeeded in quantifying the effects of policy changes and adherence to guidelines, though it revealed more policy adjustments are necessary, especially for arthroscopies.

Objectives of Research

  • The research aimed to evaluate and improve the timing of antimicrobial administration prior to equine surgical incision, and how this is influenced by different stages of the surgical process and hospital policies.
  • The study also sought to evaluate the completeness of antimicrobial recording.
  • The administration of antimicrobials within 60 minutes of surgical incision is considered the ideal practice as per human surgical guidelines. This time threshold was used as the target in this veterinary context.

Methodology

  • The study involved two clinical audits, one before and one after changes in policy related to patient preparation and anesthesia record-keeping.
  • Three time variables – anesthesia pre-induction (tPRI), surgical preparation (tPREP), and time from antimicrobial administration to surgical incision (tAB-INC) were calculated and compared.
  • The research considered both elective arthroscopies and emergency laparotomies.
  • The audits also checked for completeness of the antimicrobial recording practice.

Findings

  • The study achieved the targeted median tAB-INC of less than 60 minutes in laparotomies. This achievement was consistent across both audits.
  • The study found a positive relationship between the number of operated joints and tPREP, indicating that surgeries involving more joints required longer preparation.
  • The percentage of procedures that met the tAB-INC target did not improve between the audits.
  • However, the recording of antimicrobial administration improved markedly for elective arthroscopies, and slightly for emergency laparotomies.

Conclusion

  • The clinical audits successfully quantified the impact of changes made to hospital policies and adherence to antimicrobial prophylaxis guidelines.
  • Despite improvements in record-keeping, further policy changes were found to be necessary to hit the target of tAB-INC being less than 60 minutes for arthroscopy procedures.

Cite This Article

APA
Ceriotti S, Westerfeld R, Bonilla AG, Pang DSJ. (2021). Use of Clinical Audits to Evaluate Timing of Preoperative Antimicrobials in Equine Surgery at a Veterinary Teaching Hospital. Front Vet Sci, 8, 630111. https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2021.630111

Publication

Frontiers in veterinary science
ISSN: 2297-1769
NlmUniqueID: 101666658
Country: Switzerland
Language: English
Volume: 8
Pages: 630111
PII: 630111

Researcher Affiliations

Ceriotti, Serena
  • Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Montreal, Saint-Hyacinthe, QC, Canada.
Westerfeld, Roxane
  • Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Montreal, Saint-Hyacinthe, QC, Canada.
Bonilla, Alvaro G
  • Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Montreal, Saint-Hyacinthe, QC, Canada.
Pang, Daniel S J
  • Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Montreal, Saint-Hyacinthe, QC, Canada.

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

References

This article includes 31 references
  1. Gulland A. WHO launches global guidelines to stop surgical site infections.. BMJ 2016 Nov 3;355:i5942.
    doi: 10.1136/bmj.i5942pubmed: 27810859google scholar: lookup
  2. Hansen E, Belden K, Silibovsky R, Vogt M, Arnold WV, Bicanic G, Bini SA, Catani F, Chen J, Ghazavi MT, Godefroy KM, Holham P, Hosseinzadeh H, Kim KI, Kirketerp-Møller K, Lidgren L, Lin JH, Lonner JH, Moore CC, Papagelopoulos P, Poultsides L, Randall RL, Roslund B, Saleh K, Salmon JV, Schwarz EM, Stuyck J, Dahl AW, Yamada K. Perioperative antibiotics.. J Arthroplasty 2014 Feb;29(2 Suppl):29-48.
    doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2013.09.030pubmed: 24355256google scholar: lookup
  3. Morley PS, Apley MD, Besser TE, Burney DP, Fedorka-Cray PJ, Papich MG, Traub-Dargatz JL, Weese JS. Antimicrobial drug use in veterinary medicine.. J Vet Intern Med 2005 Jul-Aug;19(4):617-29.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1939-1676.2005.tb02739.xpubmed: 16095186google scholar: lookup
  4. Southwood LL. Perioperative antimicrobials: should we be concerned about antimicrobial drug use in equine surgical patients?. Equine Vet J 2014 May;46(3):267-9.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.12247pubmed: 24716707google scholar: lookup
  5. Dallap Schaer BL, Linton JK, Aceto H. Antimicrobial use in horses undergoing colic surgery.. J Vet Intern Med 2012 Nov-Dec;26(6):1449-56.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1939-1676.2012.01024.xpubmed: 23167747google scholar: lookup
  6. Horspool LJ, McKellar QA. Disposition of penicillin G sodium following intravenous and oral administration to Equidae.. Br Vet J 1995 Jul-Aug;151(4):401-12.
    doi: 10.1016/S0007-1935(95)80129-4pubmed: 7552196google scholar: lookup
  7. Love DN, Rose RJ, Martin IC, Bailey M. Serum concentrations of penicillin in the horse after administration of a variety of penicillin preparations.. Equine Vet J 1983 Jan;15(1):43-8.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.1983.tb01700.xpubmed: 6825648google scholar: lookup
  8. Magdesian KG, Hogan PM, Cohen ND, Brumbaugh GW, Bernard WV. Pharmacokinetics of a high dose of gentamicin administered intravenously or intramuscularly to horses.. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1998 Oct 1;213(7):1007-11.
    pubmed: 9776999
  9. Weese JS, Cruz A. Retrospective study of perioperative antimicrobial use practices in horses undergoing elective arthroscopic surgery at a veterinary teaching hospital.. Can Vet J 2009 Feb;50(2):185-8.
    pmc: PMC2629423pubmed: 19412399
  10. Muntwyler N, Dubois MS, Weese JS. Retrospective assessment of perioperative antimicrobial use for elective arthroscopy in horses.. Vet Surg 2020 Apr;49(3):427-435.
    doi: 10.1111/vsu.13382pubmed: 31950522google scholar: lookup
  11. Rose N, Toews L, Pang DS. A systematic review of clinical audit in companion animal veterinary medicine.. BMC Vet Res 2016 Feb 26;12:40.
    doi: 10.1186/s12917-016-0661-4pmc: PMC4769507pubmed: 26920614google scholar: lookup
  12. Rose N, Pang DSJ. A practical guide to implementing clinical audit.. Can Vet J 2021 Feb;62(2):145-152.
    pmc: PMC7808188pubmed: 33542553
  13. Rayment K. Clinical audit - a means of evaluating ‘quality'.. In Practice 2002;24:481–4.
    doi: 10.1136/inpract.24.8.481google scholar: lookup
  14. Viner B. Clinical audit in veterinary practice - the story so far.. Practice 2005;27:215–8.
    doi: 10.1136/inpract.27.4.215google scholar: lookup
  15. Edwards KE, Hagen SM, Hannam J, Kruger C, Yu R, Merry AF. A randomized comparison between records made with an anesthesia information management system and by hand, and evaluation of the Hawthorne effect.. Can J Anaesth 2013 Oct;60(10):990-7.
    doi: 10.1007/s12630-013-0003-ypubmed: 23934747google scholar: lookup
  16. Steinberg JP, Braun BI, Hellinger WC, Kusek L, Bozikis MR, Bush AJ, Dellinger EP, Burke JP, Simmons B, Kritchevsky SB. Timing of antimicrobial prophylaxis and the risk of surgical site infections: results from the Trial to Reduce Antimicrobial Prophylaxis Errors.. Ann Surg 2009 Jul;250(1):10-6.
    doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181ad5fcapubmed: 19561486google scholar: lookup
  17. Borg H, Carmalt JL. Postoperative septic arthritis after elective equine arthroscopy without antimicrobial prophylaxis.. Vet Surg 2013 Apr;42(3):262-6.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1532-950X.2013.01106.xpubmed: 23432412google scholar: lookup
  18. Clark C, Greenwood S, Boison JO, Chirino-Trejo M, Dowling PM. Bacterial isolates from equine infections in western Canada (1998-2003).. Can Vet J 2008 Feb;49(2):153-60.
    pmc: PMC2216435pubmed: 18309745
  19. Vigoda MM, Lubarsky DA. The medicolegal importance of enhancing timeliness of documentation when using an anesthesia information system and the response to automated feedback in an academic practice.. Anesth Analg 2006 Jul;103(1):131-6, table of contents.
    doi: 10.1213/01.ane.0000221602.90315.49pubmed: 16790641google scholar: lookup
  20. Vigoda MM, Lubarsky DA. Failure to recognize loss of incoming data in an anesthesia record-keeping system may have increased medical liability.. Anesth Analg 2006 Jun;102(6):1798-802.
    doi: 10.1213/01.ane.0000217235.25350.5epubmed: 16717328google scholar: lookup
  21. Falcon D, François P, Jacquot C, Payen JF. [Evaluating the quality of the anesthetic records].. Ann Fr Anesth Reanim 1999 Mar;18(3):360-7.
    doi: 10.1016/S0750-7658(99)80063-Xpubmed: 10228676google scholar: lookup
  22. Tanner J, Norrie P, Melen K. Preoperative hair removal to reduce surgical site infection.. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011 Nov 9;(11):CD004122.
    doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004122.pub4pubmed: 22071812google scholar: lookup
  23. Santschi EM. Prevention of postoperative infections in horses.. Vet Clin North Am Equine Pract 2006 Aug;22(2):323-34, viii.
    doi: 10.1016/j.cveq.2006.03.002pubmed: 16882478google scholar: lookup
  24. Brunsting JY, Pille FJ, Oosterlinck M, Haspeslagh M, Wilderjans HC. Incidence and risk factors of surgical site infection and septic arthritis after elective arthroscopy in horses.. Vet Surg 2018 Jan;47(1):52-59.
    doi: 10.1111/vsu.12699pubmed: 29034493google scholar: lookup
  25. Olds AM, Stewart AA, Freeman DE, Schaeffer DJ. Evaluation of the rate of development of septic arthritis after elective arthroscopy in horses: 7 cases (1994-2003).. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2006 Dec 15;229(12):1949-54.
    doi: 10.2460/javma.229.12.1949pubmed: 17173536google scholar: lookup
  26. Hubbell JA, Muir WW, Robertson JT, Sams RA. Cardiovascular effects of intravenous sodium penicillin, sodium cefazolin, and sodium citrate in awake and anesthetized horses.. Vet Surg 1987 May-Jun;16(3):245-50.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1532-950X.1987.tb00947.xpubmed: 3507151google scholar: lookup
  27. van Kasteren ME, Kullberg BJ, de Boer AS, Mintjes-de Groot J, Gyssens IC. Adherence to local hospital guidelines for surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis: a multicentre audit in Dutch hospitals.. J Antimicrob Chemother 2003 Jun;51(6):1389-96.
    doi: 10.1093/jac/dkg264pubmed: 12746377google scholar: lookup
  28. Yang Z, Zhao P, Wang J, Tong L, Cao J, Tian Y, Yao Z, Wang J, Zhu Y, Jia Y, Wen A. DRUGS system enhancing adherence of Chinese surgeons to antibiotic use guidelines during perioperative period.. PLoS One 2014;9(8):e102226.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0102226pmc: PMC4141742pubmed: 25148306google scholar: lookup
  29. Alerany C, Campany D, Monterde J, Semeraro C. Impact of local guidelines and an integrated dispensing system on antibiotic prophylaxis quality in a surgical centre.. J Hosp Infect 2005 Jun;60(2):111-7.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jhin.2004.07.022pubmed: 15866008google scholar: lookup
  30. Ozgun H, Ertugrul BM, Soyder A, Ozturk B, Aydemir M. Peri-operative antibiotic prophylaxis: adherence to guidelines and effects of educational intervention.. Int J Surg 2010;8(2):159-63.
    doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2009.12.005pubmed: 20026001google scholar: lookup
  31. Hawn MT, Richman JS, Vick CC, Deierhoi RJ, Graham LA, Henderson WG, Itani KM. Timing of surgical antibiotic prophylaxis and the risk of surgical site infection.. JAMA Surg 2013 Jul;148(7):649-57.
    doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2013.134pubmed: 23552769google scholar: lookup

Citations

This article has been cited 2 times.
  1. Rockow M, Griffenhagen G, Landolt G, Hendrickson D, Pezzanite L. Current Antimicrobial Use in Horses Undergoing Exploratory Celiotomy: A Survey of Board-Certified Equine Specialists. Animals (Basel) 2023 Apr 22;13(9).
    doi: 10.3390/ani13091433pubmed: 37174470google scholar: lookup
  2. Kauter A, Brombach J, Lübke-Becker A, Kannapin D, Bang C, Franzenburg S, Stoeckle SD, Mellmann A, Scherff N, Köck R, Guenther S, Wieler LH, Gehlen H, Semmler T, Wolf SA, Walther B. Antibiotic prophylaxis and hospitalization of horses subjected to median laparotomy: gut microbiota trajectories and abundance increase of Escherichia. Front Microbiol 2023;14:1228845.
    doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2023.1228845pubmed: 38075913google scholar: lookup
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,344 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.