A Vermeiren, M. Verheyden, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
F. Verheyden, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Heilig Hart Hospital Lier, Lier, Belgium.
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2020 Jun;478(6):1359-1365. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000001121.
Surgical helmet systems commonly are stand-alone systems with a single fan blowing air into the suit, creating positive pressure that blows particles out through areas of low resistance, possibly contaminating surgical attire and the surgical field. Two-fan systems were developed more recently to release spent air, also theoretically lowering pressure in the suit and decreasing the aforementioned risk of particle contamination. To our knowledge no study to date has measured the potential differences in gown particle contamination to support this hypothesis.
QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We compared a commonly used single-fan system versus a two-fan system and asked: (1) Which fan system results in less gown particle contamination? (2) Are there differences between the systems in the location of contamination?
Using an existing experimental study model, two surgeons performed five 30-minute TKA simulations comparing a single-fan to a double-fan helmet system after applying fluorescent powder to the hands, axillae, and chest. Both are two-piece hood and gown systems. The single-fan sits on top of the helmet blowing air into the suit; the double-fan system has a second fan positioned at the rear blowing out spent air. Ultraviolet light-enhanced photographs were subsequently obtained of the flexor and extensor surfaces of the arms, axillary areas, and front and back of the chest. We chose these locations because they all contain either a seam or an overlap between gown and hood or gloves through which particles can escape. The images were scored for contamination on a scale of 1 (zero specks) to 4 (> 100 specks) by three independent observers. Interobserver correlation was assessed through Spearman's test yielding 0.91 (95% CI 0.86 to 0.94; p < 0.0001), 0.81 (95% CI 0.73 to 0.87; p < 0.0001) and 0.87 (95% CI 0.80 to 0.91; p < 0.0001) between observers 1 and 2, observers 1 and 3, and observers 2 and 3, rendering the used scale reliable. Results of the observers were averaged and compared using the Mann-Whitney U test.
There was no difference in overall gown particle contamination between the systems (overall single-fan median contamination score 2.5 of 4 [interquartile range Q1-Q3 0-3.42] versus double fan 1 out of 4 (Q1-Q3 0-3); p = 0.082), but all tests showed there was contamination at the gown-glove interface. In general, there were few differences between the two systems in terms of location of the contamination; however, when comparing only the axillary regions, we found that the single-fan group (median score 3.67 [Q1-Q3 3-4]) showed more contamination than the double-fan group (2.33 [Q1-Q3 0-3.08]); p = 0.01.
We found no difference in gown particle contamination between a single-fan and a double-fan helmet design. However, we note that contamination was present in all tests with both systems, so surgeons should not assume that these systems provide a contamination-free environment.
When using such helmets, the surgeon should not place items close to the axillary region because the seam of the gown may have low resistance to particle contamination. Gown designs could be improved by creating better seals, especially at the arm-body seam.
外科手术头盔系统通常是独立的系统,只有一个风扇将空气吹入套装,产生正压,将颗粒通过低阻力区域吹出,可能会污染手术服和手术区域。最近开发了双风扇系统来释放用过的空气,理论上也降低了套装中的压力,并降低了上述颗粒污染的风险。据我们所知,目前还没有研究测量手术服的潜在差异来支持这一假设。
问题/目的:我们比较了常用的单风扇系统和双风扇系统,并提出了以下问题:(1)哪种风扇系统会导致手术服上的颗粒污染更少?(2)系统之间在污染位置上是否存在差异?
使用现有的实验研究模型,两名外科医生在双手、腋窝和胸部涂抹荧光粉后,分别进行了五次 30 分钟的 TKA 模拟,比较了单风扇和双风扇头盔系统。两种系统都是两件式头罩和手术服系统。单风扇位于头盔上方,将空气吹入套装;双风扇系统在后部有一个第二个风扇,将用过的空气吹出。随后,用紫外线增强照片拍摄手臂的屈肌和伸肌表面、腋窝区域以及胸部的前后侧。我们选择这些位置是因为它们都包含手术服和头罩或手套之间的缝线或重叠,颗粒可以通过这些部位逸出。图像的污染程度根据从 1(无斑点)到 4(>100 个斑点)的量表由三名独立观察者进行评分。观察者之间的相关性通过 Spearman 检验进行评估,得出 0.91(95%CI 0.86 至 0.94;p<0.0001)、0.81(95%CI 0.73 至 0.87;p<0.0001)和 0.87(95%CI 0.80 至 0.91;p<0.0001),表明使用的量表是可靠的。观察者的结果进行平均,并使用 Mann-Whitney U 检验进行比较。
系统之间的手术服总颗粒污染没有差异(单风扇系统的总体污染中位数评分为 4 分中的 2.5(四分位距 Q1-Q3 0-3.42),双风扇系统为 1 分中的 4(Q1-Q3 0-3);p=0.082),但两种系统在污染位置方面几乎没有差异;然而,当仅比较腋窝区域时,我们发现单风扇组(中位数评分为 3.67(Q1-Q3 3-4))比双风扇组(2.33(Q1-Q3 0-3.08))污染更严重;p=0.01。
我们发现单风扇和双风扇头盔设计之间在手术服颗粒污染方面没有差异。然而,我们注意到,两种系统的所有测试都存在污染,因此外科医生不应假设这些系统提供了无污染的环境。
使用此类头盔时,外科医生不应将物品放置在靠近腋窝区域,因为手术服的缝线可能对颗粒污染具有较低的抵抗力。通过创建更好的密封件,特别是在手臂-身体的缝合处,可以改进手术服的设计。