Reducing Veterinary Waste: Surgical Site Infection Risk and the Ecological Impact of Woven and Disposable Drapes

  • Molly Vasanthakumar Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies Easter Bush Campus, Midlothian EH25 9RG

Published:

2019-07-05

Share
Open Access Logo

DOI

https://doi.org/10.18849/ve.v4i3.251

Abstract

PICO question

In animals undergoing surgery, does the use of disposable synthetic drapes reduce the risk of surgical site infections when compared to reusable woven drapes?

Clinical bottom line

Current literature on the risk of surgical site infection with disposable and reusable drapes in animals is limited. Three human studies were reviewed, one systematic review and two controlled trials. Both these study types generally provide high levels of evidence; however their individual limitations reduce the quality of their data. Overall the results were mixed, and due to the small number of reviewed papers and the fact that only one study specifically measured surgical site infection as the outcome, it is not possible to conclude that disposable drapes reduce the risk of surgical site infections (SSI) when compared to reusable drapes.

The impact of the veterinary profession on the ecosystem is often ignored. When following the One Health concept, vets must consider the ecological impact of clinical decisions. Choosing reusable drapes for certain clean, elective procedures may be a way to reduce waste without compromising the health of patients.


Open Access Peer Reviewed

Author Biography

Molly Vasanthakumar, Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies Easter Bush Campus, Midlothian EH25 9RG

Veterinary Student

References

BELLCHAMBERS, J., HARRIS, J., CULLINAN, P., GAYA, H., PEPPER, J. (1999). A prospective study of wound infection in coronary artery surgery. European Journal of Cardio-thoracic Surgery. 15 pp.45–50. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1010-7940(98)00255-3

DELISSER, P.J., SINNETT, D.E., PARSONS, K.J., FRIEND, E.J. (2012). A survey of surgical draping practices in small-animal practice in the UK. Veterinary Record. 171(13) DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/vr.100406

DICONSIGLIO, J. (2008). Reprocessing SUDs reduces waste, costs. Materials management in health care. [online] 17(9) pp.40–42. Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18972859

Ellenmacarthurfoundation.org. (2019). The New Plastics Economy: Rethinking the future of plastics. [online] Available at: https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/publications/the-new-plastics-economy-rethinking-the-future-of-plastics

GEYER, R., JAMBECK, J.R., LAW, K.L. (2017). Production, use and fate of all plastics ever made. Science Advances. 3(7). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1700782

GOLLAPALLI, M., KOTA, S. (2018). Methane emissions from a landfill in north-east India:Performance of various landfill gas emission models. Environmental Pollution. 234 pp.174–180. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2017.11.064

IBBOTSON, S., DETTMER, T., KARA, S., HERRMANN, C. (2013). Eco-efficiency of disposable and reusable surgical instruments-a scissors case. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment. 18(5) pp.1137–1148 DOI: 1007/s11367-013-0547-7

JALOVAARA, P., PURANEN, J. (1989). Air bacterial and particle counts in total hip replacement operations using non-woven and cotton gowns and drapes. Journal of Hospital Infection. 14, pp.333–338. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0195-6701(89)90073-X

KIESER, D., WYATT, M., BESWICK, A., KUNUTSOR, S., HOOPER, G. (2018). Does the type of surgical drape (disposable versus non-disposable) affect the risk of subsequent surgical site infection? Journal of Orthopaedics. 15(2), pp.566–570. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jor.2018.05.015

LAUFMAN, H., EUDY, W., VANDERNOOT, A., LIU, D., HARRIS, C. (1975). Strike-through of moist contamination by woven and non-woven surgical materials. The Annals of Surgery. 181(6) pp.857–862. DOI: 1097/00000658-197506000-00018

OWEN, L., GINES, J., KNOWLES, T., HOLT, P. (2009). Efficacy of Adhesive Incise Drapes in Preventing Bacterial Contamination of Clean Canine Surgical Wounds. Veterinary Surgery. 38(6), pp.732–737.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-950X.2009.00537.x

RIBEIRO, C.D., VAN DE BURGWAL, L.H.M., REGEER, B.J (2019). Overcoming challenges for designing and implementing the One Health approach: A systematic review of the literature. One Health. DOI: 10.1016/j.onehlt.2019.100085

SHOWALTER, B.M., CRANTFORD, J.C., RUSSEL, G.B. MARKS, M.W., DEFRANZO, A.J., THOMPSON, J.T., PESTANA, I.A,. DAVID, L.R. (2014). The effect of reusable versus disposable draping material on infection rates in implant-based breast reconstruction: a prospective randomized trial. Annals of Plastic Surgery. 72(6) pp.165–169. DOI: 1097/SAP.0000000000000086

STALL, N.M., KAGOMA, Y.K., BONDY, J.N., NAUDIE, D. (2013). Surgical waste audit of 5 total knee arthroplasties. Canadian Journal of Surgery. 56 (2) pp.97–102. DOI: 1503/cjs.015711

THORNTON, J. MCCALLY, M., ORRIS, P., WEINBERG, J. (1996). Hospitals and plastics. Dioxin prevention and medical waste incinerators. Public Health Rep. 111(4) pp.298–313. Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1381872/

VOZZOLA, E., OVERCASH, M., GRIFFING, E. (2018) Environmental considerations in the selection of isolation gowns: A life cycle assessment of reusable and disposable alternatives. American Journal of Infection Control. 46 (8) pp.881–886. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2018.02.002

Vol. 4 No. 3 (2019): The third issue of 2019

Section: Knowledge Summaries

Categories :  Small Animal  /  Dogs  /  Cats  /  Rabbits  /  Production Animal  /  Cattle  /  Sheep  /  Pig  /  Equine  /  Exotics  /