Cargando…

Safety and efficacy of resistive polymer versus forced air warming in total joint surgery

BACKGROUND: Forced-air warming is used as a mechanism to prevent hypothermia and adverse outcomes associated with hypothermia among patients undergoing surgery. Patient safety in healthcare includes the use of devices and technology that minimize potential adverse events to patients. The present stu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sandoval, Melanie F., Mongan, Paul D., Dayton, Michael R., Hogan, Craig A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5391580/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28416968
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13037-017-0126-0
_version_ 1783229301962833920
author Sandoval, Melanie F.
Mongan, Paul D.
Dayton, Michael R.
Hogan, Craig A.
author_facet Sandoval, Melanie F.
Mongan, Paul D.
Dayton, Michael R.
Hogan, Craig A.
author_sort Sandoval, Melanie F.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Forced-air warming is used as a mechanism to prevent hypothermia and adverse outcomes associated with hypothermia among patients undergoing surgery. Patient safety in healthcare includes the use of devices and technology that minimize potential adverse events to patients. The present study sought to compare the capabilities of patient warming between two different devices that use different mechanisms of warming: forced-air warming and non-air warming. METHODS: One hundred twenty patients undergoing total hip or total knee arthroplasty received patient warming via a forced warming device or non-air warming fabric conductive material. The project was part of a quality improvement initiative to identify warming devices effective in maintaining normothermic patient core temperatures during orthopedic surgery. RESULTS: Forced-air warming and non-air warming achieved similar results in maintaining the core temperature of patients undergoing total knee or hip arthroplasty. No adverse events were reported in either group. Operating room staff observed that the non-air warming device was less noisy and appreciated the disposable covers that could be changed after each surgical case. CONCLUSIONS: These findings demonstrate that hypothermia is achieved by both forced-air and non-forced air warming devices among total knee and hip arthroplasty patients. The potential for airflow disruption is present with the forced-air warming device and does not exist with the non-forced air device. The disruption of laminar airflow may be associated with surgical site infections. The disposable covers used to protect the device and patient have potential implications for surgical site infection. Quality improvement efforts aimed to enhance patient safety should include the implementation of healthcare equipment with the least known or suspected risk.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5391580
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-53915802017-04-17 Safety and efficacy of resistive polymer versus forced air warming in total joint surgery Sandoval, Melanie F. Mongan, Paul D. Dayton, Michael R. Hogan, Craig A. Patient Saf Surg Short Report BACKGROUND: Forced-air warming is used as a mechanism to prevent hypothermia and adverse outcomes associated with hypothermia among patients undergoing surgery. Patient safety in healthcare includes the use of devices and technology that minimize potential adverse events to patients. The present study sought to compare the capabilities of patient warming between two different devices that use different mechanisms of warming: forced-air warming and non-air warming. METHODS: One hundred twenty patients undergoing total hip or total knee arthroplasty received patient warming via a forced warming device or non-air warming fabric conductive material. The project was part of a quality improvement initiative to identify warming devices effective in maintaining normothermic patient core temperatures during orthopedic surgery. RESULTS: Forced-air warming and non-air warming achieved similar results in maintaining the core temperature of patients undergoing total knee or hip arthroplasty. No adverse events were reported in either group. Operating room staff observed that the non-air warming device was less noisy and appreciated the disposable covers that could be changed after each surgical case. CONCLUSIONS: These findings demonstrate that hypothermia is achieved by both forced-air and non-forced air warming devices among total knee and hip arthroplasty patients. The potential for airflow disruption is present with the forced-air warming device and does not exist with the non-forced air device. The disruption of laminar airflow may be associated with surgical site infections. The disposable covers used to protect the device and patient have potential implications for surgical site infection. Quality improvement efforts aimed to enhance patient safety should include the implementation of healthcare equipment with the least known or suspected risk. BioMed Central 2017-04-14 /pmc/articles/PMC5391580/ /pubmed/28416968 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13037-017-0126-0 Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Short Report
Sandoval, Melanie F.
Mongan, Paul D.
Dayton, Michael R.
Hogan, Craig A.
Safety and efficacy of resistive polymer versus forced air warming in total joint surgery
title Safety and efficacy of resistive polymer versus forced air warming in total joint surgery
title_full Safety and efficacy of resistive polymer versus forced air warming in total joint surgery
title_fullStr Safety and efficacy of resistive polymer versus forced air warming in total joint surgery
title_full_unstemmed Safety and efficacy of resistive polymer versus forced air warming in total joint surgery
title_short Safety and efficacy of resistive polymer versus forced air warming in total joint surgery
title_sort safety and efficacy of resistive polymer versus forced air warming in total joint surgery
topic Short Report
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5391580/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28416968
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13037-017-0126-0
work_keys_str_mv AT sandovalmelanief safetyandefficacyofresistivepolymerversusforcedairwarmingintotaljointsurgery
AT monganpauld safetyandefficacyofresistivepolymerversusforcedairwarmingintotaljointsurgery
AT daytonmichaelr safetyandefficacyofresistivepolymerversusforcedairwarmingintotaljointsurgery
AT hogancraiga safetyandefficacyofresistivepolymerversusforcedairwarmingintotaljointsurgery