Influence of Adhesive Incise Drape Use on Surgical Site Infection Rates in Contaminated and Dirty Abdominal Operations.

BACKGROUND: Surgical Site Infection (SSI) remains the most common cause of Healthcare-Associated Infections (HCAIs). In particular, contaminated and dirty abdominal wounds are attended by a high rate of SSI which in turn is associated with a huge burden on patients, caregivers and the entire health care system. OBJECTIVE: To compare SSI rates following the use of iodine-impregnated adhesive incise drapes (Ioban) with routine conventional drapes in contaminated and dirty abdominal surgical wounds in a Nigerian tertiary hospital. METHODOLOGY: Consecutive, consenting adult patients who underwent laparotomy for cases classified as contaminated and dirty were prospectively enrolled in the study. Patients in the investigation arm had in addition to conventional drapes, iodine-impregnated adhesive incise drapes (Ioban) applied on the skin of the abdomen through which incisions were made, while patients in the control arm only had routine conventional drapes applied. All patients were followed up to 30 days after the operation. Surgical site infection rates were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Sixty-two consecutive patients were enrolled into this study, of which 55 completed the 30-day follow-up. The mean ages of patients in the two groups were 37.96 ± 19.59 years and 36.74 ± 16.93 years (p=0.81). Males were 36 (65.5%) and females were 19 (34.5%). Overall, 30 (54.5%) patients had surgical site infection (SSI) in this study. Thirteen (46.4%) patients had SSI in iodine iodine-impregnated adhesive incise drape group while 17 (63%) patients had SSI in the conventional drape group, a difference that was not statistically significant (p=0.22). The most commonly isolated organism from infected wounds was Klebsiella species. CONCLUSION: The use of iodine-impregnated surgical incise drapes was associated with a lower, though non-statistically significant SSI rates compared to the use of conventional drapes. This marginal benefit will require a larger population study to examine its potential cost-effectiveness in our setting.