Email updates

Keep up to date with the latest news and content from Patient Safety in Surgery and BioMed Central.

Open Access Research

Comparison of three distinct surgical clothing systems for protection from air-borne bacteria: A prospective observational study

Ann Tammelin13*, Bengt Ljungqvist2 and Berit Reinmüller2

Author Affiliations

1 Department of Medicine, Solna (MedS), Unit of Infectious Diseases, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden

2 Department of Energy and Environment, Division of Building Services Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology, Göteborg, Sweden

3 Department of Infection Control and Hospital Hygiene, Stockholm County Council, Södersjukhuset, hiss S, plan −1, Stockholm, SE-118 83, Sweden

For all author emails, please log on.

Patient Safety in Surgery 2012, 6:23  doi:10.1186/1754-9493-6-23

Published: 15 October 2012

Abstract

Background

To prevent surgical site infection it is desirable to keep bacterial counts low in the operating room air during orthopaedic surgery, especially prosthetic surgery. As the air-borne bacteria are mainly derived from the skin flora of the personnel present in the operating room a reduction could be achieved by using a clothing system for staff made from a material fulfilling the requirements in the standard EN 13795. The aim of this study was to compare the protective capacity between three clothing systems made of different materials – one mixed cotton/polyester and two polyesters - which all had passed the tests according to EN 13795.

Methods

Measuring of CFU/m3 air was performed during 21 orthopaedic procedures performed in four operating rooms with turbulent, mixing ventilation with air flows of 755 – 1,050 L/s. All staff in the operating room wore clothes made from the same material during each surgical procedure.

Results

The source strength (mean value of CFU emitted from one person per second) calculated for the three garments were 4.1, 2.4 and 0.6 respectively. In an operating room with an air flow of 755 L/s both clothing systems made of polyester reduced the amount of CFU/m3 significantly compared to the clothing system made from mixed material. In an operating room with air intake of 1,050 L/s a significant reduction was only achieved with the polyester that had the lowest source strength.

Conclusions

Polyester has a better protective capacity than cotton/polyester. There is need for more discriminating tests of the protective efficacy of textile materials intended to use for operating garment.

Keywords:
Orthopaedic surgery; Protective clothing; Ventilation