A Systematic Review of Risk Factors Associated with Surgical Site Infections among Surgical Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
IMPORTANCE: Surgical site infection (SSI) complicates 2-5% of surgeries in the United States. Severity of SSI ranges from superficial skin infection to life-threatening conditions such as severe sepsis, and SSIs are responsible for increased morbidity, mortality, and economic burden associated with surgery. Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus) is a commonly-isolated organism for SSI, and methicillin-resistant S. aureus SSI incidence is increasing globally. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this systematic review was to characterize risk factors for SSI within observational studies describing incidence of SSI in a real-world setting. EVIDENCE REVIEW: An initial search identified 328 titles published in 2002-2012; 57 were identified as relevant for data extraction. Extracted information included study design and methodology, reported cumulative incidence and post-surgical time until onset of SSI, and odds ratios and associated variability for all factors considered in univariate and/or multivariable analyses. FINDINGS: Median SSI incidence was 3.7%, ranging from 0.1% to 50.4%. Incidence of overall SSI and S. aureus SSI were both highest in tumor-related and transplant surgeries. Median time until SSI onset was 17.0 days, with longer time-to-onset for orthopedic and transplant surgeries. Risk factors consistently identified as associated with SSI included co-morbidities, advanced age, risk indices, patient frailty, and surgery complexity. Thirteen studies considered diabetes as a risk factor in multivariable analysis; 85% found a significant association with SSI, with odds ratios ranging from 1.5-24.3. Longer surgeries were associated with increased SSI risk, with a median odds ratio of 2.3 across 11 studies reporting significant results. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In a broad review of published literature, risk factors for SSI were characterized as describing reduced fitness, patient frailty, surgery duration, and complexity. Recognition of risk factors frequently associated with SSI allows for identification of such patients with the greatest need for optimal preventive measures to be identified and pre-treatment prior to surgery.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.044 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.017 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".