ArticlePDF Available

Infection Rate Comparison during Transition from Hospital to Office WALANT Enabled by Virtual Reality

Authors:

Abstract and Figures

Background:. We transitioned our hand practice from the operating room (OR) to our office-based procedure room (OPR) to offer wide-awake, local anesthesia, no tourniquet (WALANT). We have established that using wide-awake virtual reality improves patient comfort and anxiety during wide-awake procedures and helps facilitate our patients’ choice of venue. We aimed to assess the effect of this transition on infection rates for procedures performed by a single surgeon in the OR versus the OPR. Methods:. A retrospective chart review was performed on a single surgeon’s adult patients who underwent elective and closed traumatic upper limb surgeries. A surgical site infection was defined as superficial or deep, based on clinical examination conducted by the surgeon, and was treated with antibiotics within a 4-week postoperative window. Results:. From August 2017 to August 2019, 538 (216 OR and 322 OPR) consecutive cases met inclusion criteria. There were six (2.78%) superficial infections and zero deep space infections in the OR cohort compared with four (1.24%) superficial and zero deep space infections in the OPR cohort with no statistical significance. Two-thirds of cases were converted to WALANT and delivered in the office. Conclusions:. This narrative study concurs with the current literature that WALANT in the office setting is as safe as the hospital OR-based procedures for selected elective cases. By transitioning suitable cases from the OR to the OPR, a surgeon’s overall infection rate should not change.
www.PRSGlobalOpen.com 1
Related Digital Media are available in the full-text ver-
sion of the article on www.PRSGlobalOpen.com.
Disclosure: Dr. Clarkson is the Chief Medical Ofcer for
a Virtual Reality Company “Wide Awake VR”. No funding
was received for this article.
From the *Michigan State University College of Human Medicine,
East Lansing, Mich.; †Department of Surgery, Michigan State
University, East Lansing, Mich.; and ‡Department of Surgery,
Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Michigan State
University, East Lansing, Mich.
Received for publication October 20, 2021; accepted February 28,
2022.
Presented as a poster at the ASSH Annual Meeting, San Antonio,
Tex., October 1, 2020.
Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health,
Inc. on behalf of The American Society of Plastic Surgeons. This
is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative
Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0
(CCBY-NC-ND), where it is permissible to download and share the
work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in
any way or used commercially without permission from the journal.
DOI: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000004285
Hand
INTRODUCTION
The engineering required to support sterile technique
and general anesthesia rst came together in the operat-
ing room in the early 20th century, creating the walled
garden that enabled the golden age of surgical devel-
opment to take place.1 This delivery model still dictates
the location and method of surgical and anesthesia care
while more surgeries than ever before are offered to an
aging population of increasingly frail patients. The most
routine smaller hand procedures are at the front line in
the debate over whether we might be providing overly
expensive, environmentally wasteful, and unproven lev-
els of sterile services in addition to unnecessary exposure
to anesthesia. (See gure, Supplemental Digital Content
1, which displays the main operating room triad. http://
links.lww.com/PRSGO/C11.)
Patient morbidity will be reduced once central ner-
vous anesthesia is truly found to be unnecessary for a
large percentage of a hand practice. For example, it is
observed that 12% of older patients undergoing a gen-
eral anesthetic develop cognitive decline in the postop-
erative period, 40% of whom do not fully recover by 6
months.2 Wide-awake, local anesthesia, no tourniquet
(WALANT) has also challenged long-held unproven
Tannur C. Oakes, MD*
Karren C. Wong, MD*
Kyle J. Schank, MD
Pam Haan, BSN
Stephanie M. Bray, MD, MS
James H. W. Clarkson, MD
Abstract
Background: We transitioned our hand practice from the operating room (OR)
to our ofce-based procedure room (OPR) to offer wide-awake, local anesthesia,
no tourniquet (WALANT). We have established that using wide-awake virtual real-
ity improves patient comfort and anxiety during wide-awake procedures and helps
facilitate our patients’ choice of venue. We aimed to assess the effect of this transi-
tion on infection rates for procedures performed by a single surgeon in the OR
versus the OPR.
Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed on a single surgeon’s adult
patients who underwent elective and closed traumatic upper limb surgeries. A sur-
gical site infection was dened as supercial or deep, based on clinical examina-
tion conducted by the surgeon, and was treated with antibiotics within a 4-week
postoperative window.
Results: From August 2017 to August 2019, 538 (216 OR and 322 OPR) consecu-
tive cases met inclusion criteria. There were six (2.78%) supercial infections and
zero deep space infections in the OR cohort compared with four (1.24%) super-
cial and zero deep space infections in the OPR cohort with no statistical signi-
cance. Two-thirds of cases were converted to WALANT and delivered in the ofce.
Conclusions: This narrative study concurs with the current literature that WALANT
in the ofce setting is as safe as the hospital OR-based procedures for selected elec-
tive cases. By transitioning suitable cases from the OR to the OPR, a surgeon’s over-
all infection rate should not change. (Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2022;10:e4285;
doi: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000004285; Published online 13 May 2022.)
Infection Rate Comparison during Transition from
Hospital to Ofce WALANT Enabled by Virtual
Reality
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
PRS Global Open 2022
2
medical dictums, such as the dangers of epinephrine in
the hand, which have been shown to be errors dating
back to over 90 years ago.3
WALANT has been gaining international traction
over the last decade.4 A recent survey reported that 62%
of United States hand surgeons now incorporate some
degree of WALANT in their practice.5 Two common barri-
ers to WALANT include the physician’s concern for infec-
tion under eld sterility and a patient’s concern for the
experience during awake surgery. Over the past 20 years,
several studies have supported that simplied eld sterility
alone is suitable for many hand procedures.6–10 To address
the patient experience whilst undergoing WALANT, we
have applied the developing technology of wide-awake
virtual reality.11 Procedures done in the ofce are also
signicantly less costly than those performed in the main
operating room.12–14
With the original triad in mind, we refocused our hand
surgical practice with a new triad utilizing virtual reality
(VR) to encourage patient uptake of ofce-based surgery.
(See gure, Supplemental Digital Content 2, which dis-
plays the ofce procedure room triad. http://links.lww.
com/PRSGO/C12.)
During this period, we transitioned two-thirds of our
suitable cases from the main operating room (OR) to
the ofce-based procedure room (OPR). Prior studies
at our institution have already demonstrated the util-
ity of VR in reducing anxiety and pain while increasing
patient enjoyment for awake patients undergoing ofce
procedures.15
The objective of this study was to report our narrative
of a transition of suitable surgical cases from the main OR
to the ofce. The primary outcome measure was the com-
parative postoperative infection rates between the operat-
ing room and ofce-based procedure room.
METHODS
We performed a retrospective chart review of a single
surgeon’s (senior author JHWC) elective upper limb cases
from the OR and OPR. An institutional review board
at both centers approved the review. Surgical site infec-
tions were identied via chart review by accessing both
institutions’ electronic health records. Inclusion criteria
encompassed all adults, 18 years or older, with upper limb
surgeries at either center between August 2017 to August
2019. Patients were excluded from the study if there was
failure to follow up or if the elective surgery took place
shortly after an open trauma or recent infection, to elimi-
nate the impact of contamination from the injury on this
infection rate study. We dene “full sterility” as that found
in the main OR and “eld sterility” as that which is used
in the OPR.
Based on the CDC guidelines,16 a surgical site infection
was dened as a surgical site that on clinical examination
was deemed to be infected by the senior author, within
30 days of the procedure. This was categorized as any
evidence of cellulitis, spreading erythema or presence of
purulence. Simple suture abscesses were excluded unless
there was evidence of spreading erythema. An infection
was classied as a deep infection if it were noted to be
tracking below the fascial layer.
The OR surgeries were performed following the hos-
pital’s standard sterile protocol, including upper extrem-
ity and full body drapes in an accredited operating room.
This location was able to make use of plates and screws not
available in the OPR where internal xation was restricted
to k wires. The OPR is a single room that has been set
up to perform WALANT surgeries and other minor pro-
cedures. A single medical assistant performs circulating
and rst assistant duties. Between surgeries in the OPR,
the medical assistant washes the patient’s chair, surgical
table, stools, counter, mayo stand, and VR headset. The
VR headset has a silicone elastomer face shield, which
facilitates cleaning.
Our OPR protocol has patients rst enter an exam
room where their vitals are taken, and the surgical site is
anesthetized with tumescent local anesthesia described
by Lalonde and Wong.17 If patients are needle phobic or
anxious, they are offered the use of VR during injection.
Patients wait for approximately 30 minutes for maximal
effect, and during that time they scrub the surgical site
with iodine or chlorhexidine themselves without main-
taining sterility. Afterward they are moved to the proce-
dure room where they remain in their street clothing.
The patient is then positioned in a sitting or supine
position and VR is offered. The limb is prepared with
alcohol chlorhexidine (Chloraprep) and draped using
sterile towels. The surgeon wears sterile gloves, gown,
cap, and mask. We use an autoclave to process towels and
instruments.
Descriptive statistics were used for summarizing the
data. Pearson’s χ² and Fisher’s exact tests were conducted
on categorical variables. A logistic regression was per-
formed on variables pertaining to patient demographics.
Patient demographics included sex, age, postoperative
antibiotics, smoking status, use of immunosuppressive
drugs, use of insulin and a history of diabetes, asthma,
chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, cerebral vas-
cular accident, coronary artery disease, hypertension,
or chronic kidney disease. Patients were not matched
between cohorts.
Takeaways
Question: Does a hand surgeon’s overall infection rate
change as they transition cases from the operating room
to the clinic-based procedure room, performing the sur-
geries via the WALANT technique?
Findings: There is no statistically signicant difference
between a single surgeon’s infection rates when compar-
ing all elective and closed trauma cases between the oper-
ating room and clinic-based procedure room.
Meaning: It is safe in regard to infection rates, to operate
via WALANT in a clinic-based procedure room with the
assistance of virtual reality for patient comfort.
Oakes et al. Infection Rates: OR vs WALANT in Clinic
3
RESULTS
From August 2017 to August 2019, we identied 538
consecutive elective cases that met the inclusion crite-
ria, with 216 cases in the OR and 322 cases in the OPR
(Fig.1). Of all patients receiving surgery over that period,
two-thirds of them have converted to WALANT. The aver-
age age of the patients in the OPR cohort was greater, with
a mean of 54.8 years old, versus the mean of 46.2 years old
in the OR cohort. Along with increased age, Table1 shows
that the OPR cohort had a statistically signicant increase
in the prevalence of comorbid coronary artery disease,
diabetes, hypertension, and chronic kidney disease.
In total, there were six supercial infections and zero
deep space infections in the OR cohort compared with
four supercial and zero deep space infections in the OPR
cohort. The overall infection rate was 1.86%, and infec-
tion rates of 2.78% and 1.24% were observed in the OR
and OPR, respectively. The difference did not reach statis-
tical signicance with Fisher exact test (P = 0.211, Table2),
although it was noted that a higher rate of infection was
observed in the main OR.
Figure2 shows the breakdown of surgeries performed
over the study period. There were 597 procedures per-
formed on the 538 patients, with 81 of the patients having
multiple procedures at the same time. A subanalysis of sur-
geries involving open carpal tunnel releases (CTRs) was
done to further analyze infection rates. A total of 46 CTRs
were performed in the OR compared with 178 CTR cases
performed in the OPR. There were three incidences of
infection in the OR cases (6.7% infection rate) compared
with one identied infection in the OPR cases (0.56%
infection rate), which was noted to be statistically signi-
cant (P = 0.028). However, it should be noted that all three
of the patients in the OR underwent multiple procedures
and most OPR CTRs were done as standalone procedures.
DISCUSSION
The infection rate of 1.24% seen in our patients
undergoing WALANT hand surgery falls in the reported
observed range reported by others who operate in the
OPR.7,10 Additionally, our overall average infection rate
of 1.86% falls in the reported infection rate range of
1%–11% seen after CTR in the literature.18 When CTR
cases were analyzed, they demonstrated even lower infec-
tion rates in the ofce, with an incidence of only 0.56%.
This agrees with the multiple other studies that have
shown no increase in infection rates when compared with
the traditional OR9,19 despite the OPR population being
older with more comorbidities.
Our patients undergoing surgeries in the OPR were
poorer surgical candidates with an increased prevalence
of diabetes (24% in OPR versus 11% in OR), hyperten-
sion (44% in OPR versus 30% in OR) and chronic kidney
disease (5% in OPR versus 1% in OR). These risk factors
have been shown to increase the incidence of surgical
site infections following CTR.20 Our OPR patients were
also older, which increases the risk of anesthesia-related
complications.2,21,22
This is a narrative study comparing the transition
period when cases were moving into the ofce from the
main OR; therefore, we recognize that the two groups
are not similar, which is a weakness to the study. Once the
efciencies and safety became apparent with ofce-based
WALANT, more cases and procedures were offered in the
clinic in accordance with the surgeon’s comfort level. The
more complex cases were less likely to transition to the
ofce environment, which is seen in Figure2. Reasons to
retain more complex cases in the main OR were varied,
including the need for sophisticated or expensive equip-
ment and implants in addition to the location that the
patient was encountered such as the emergency room of
the hospital with urgent need for surgery. This compari-
son demonstrates the current real world constraints of
implementing WALANT in an ofce-based setting.
Although the implication of this study might encour-
age surgeons to migrate all their hand surgery to the ofce
environment, our study does not include permanent
indwelling implants in the ofce setting. In this study,
open reduction and internal xation were performed in
the OPR using buried K wires. The main OR was the set-
ting when an open approach was need using plates and
Fig. 1. Breakdown of patients meeting inclusion criteria.
Table 1. Demographics of the Study Population
Operating
Room Procedure
Room All
Patients Pvalues
Gender
Women 103 204 307 0.0003
Men 113 118 231
Smoking status
Nonsmoker 170 252 422 0.297
Current smoker 46 54 100
Comorbidities
Asthma 41 50 91 0.42
COPD 12 11 23 0.35
Previous CVA 4 10 14 0.476
CAD 2 21 23 0.005
Diabetes 24 78 102 0.001
HTN 64 145 209 0.001
CKD 2 15 17 0.046
Average age 46.2 54.8 51 <0.0001
Bolded Pvalues indicated signicance. COPD, chronic obstructive pulmonary
disease; CVA, cerebrovascular accident; CAD, coronary artery disease; HTN,
hypertension; CKD, chronic kidney disease.
PRS Global Open 2022
4
screws. In the face of limited evidence for the benets of
enhanced sterility, we still advocate that where the conse-
quence of deep space infection around an implant would
be devastating, it is still common sense to make use of
main OR sterility until more data are present.
The use of VR has been well documented during
anxiety provoking or painful procedures other than hand
surgery. This includes burn dressing changes, dental pro-
cedures, and inpatient invasive procedures.23–27 We have
previously demonstrated that wide-awake virtual reality
reduces anxiety, pain, and increases fun for patients.15
The same study demonstrated the safety of VR use during
WALANT procedures.
Many of our patients who were at rst hesitant to be
alert during the procedure were put at ease when offered
the ability to focus their attention elsewhere using VR.
In answer to their request “just put me out doc,” we were
able to offer to “put them somewhere else” while alert and
cooperative during the procedure. Increasing appeal with
wide-awake virtual reality allowed the practice to better
recruit patients to undergo WALANT. We are currently
looking for ways to trial this hypothesis.
The practice of medicine is replete with ritualistic behav-
iors, which serve other motives in addition to any practical
effects.28 Indeed cleansing rituals have been depicted as
an example of a “Macbeth effect,” serving both moral and
practical purposes.29 As physicians we need to be cognizant
of the possibility that behind our behaviors may lie the
bones of a more ancient cultural meme that serves to drive
these behaviors beyond their practical application. For
example, these memes may even predispose us to accept
unnecessary regulatory or industrial complexity. To enable
this insight, it is helpful to look at the original facts that lie
behind them. For hand surgery, we may examine the ori-
gins of sterile technique. William Arbuthnot Lane (1856–
1943), amongst many things, is acknowledged as Harold
Gillies’ greatest political sponsor in the First World War.
He was also the rst surgeon to introduce the plating of
orthopedic fractures. He rened and further engineered
the 19th-century work of Lister and Semmelweis with his
“no touch technique” and by introducing dry steam ster-
ilization at Guy’s Hospital in London, England, around
1904, after reading of the technology from the Berlin sur-
geon, Ernst von Bergmann. This involved no more sterile
engineering than a “pig” steam sterilizer between the oper-
ating rooms, dry sterile towel, sterile instruments, gowns,
and gloves. This is closer to our OPR “eld sterility” model
than the elaborate sterility precautions encountered in a
Table 2. Infection Breakdown in Each Operative Environment
Total Cases Supercial Infection Deep Infection Total Infections Infection Percent P
Operating Room 216 6 0 6 2.78 0.211Procedure Room 322 4 0 4 1.24
All Cases 538 10 0 10 1.86
Fig. 2. Breakdown of all procedures and the location they were performed. There were 597 total pro-
cedures in the 538 cases. Each trigger nger was counted as a separate procedure, and many nerve
releases were also performed with other procedures.
Oakes et al. Infection Rates: OR vs WALANT in Clinic
5
modern 21st-century operating room, and yet it permitted
him to commence the rst plating of closed orthopedic
fractures with close to zero reported infections.1 Although
to cut down on a closed fracture was surgical heresy at that
time, 120 years of history have proven him right. These
are the original facts and yet, over the same period, sterile
protocol has become increasingly complex and regulated,
increasing the costs associated with hospital and surgery
center services despite little evidence that more sterility is
better.
Following the current trend toward ofce-based sur-
gery, hand surgeons and health care systems who primarily
operate in the OR can feel comfortable when considering
transitioning suitable cases out of the operating room.
The evidence from this narrative study suggests that a sur-
geon should not see their overall infection rate increase
when they begin transitioning their practice to the ofce-
based procedure room for smaller cases.
The ofce-based WALANT literature is rapidly increas-
ing, demonstrating that the technique is a comparable
surgical option when compared with the traditional ways
of performing hand surgery, such as using a tourniquet,
intravenous regional anesthesia, and general anesthesia.
Have we “ritualized” sterile technique beyond its practical
effects? In Lane’s own words: “If everyone believes a thing,
it is probably untrue.”30,31
Tannur C. Oakes, MD
Michigan State University College of Human Medicine
Sparrow Professional Building, Ste. 305
1200 East Michigan Avenue
Lansing, MI 48912
E-mail: tannur.oakes@gmail.com
REFERENCES
1. Layton TB. Sir William Arbuthnot Lane, Bt., C.B., M.S. An
enquiry into the mind and inuence of a surgeon. Proc R Soc
Med. 1956;49:959.
2. Saczynski JS, Marcantonio ER, Quach L, et al. Cognitive tra-
jectories after postoperative delirium. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:
30–39.
3. Thomson CJ, Lalonde DH, Denkler KA, et al. A critical look at
the evidence for and against elective epinephrine use in the n-
ger. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2007;119:260–266.
4. Lalonde DH. Latest advances in wide awake hand surgery. Hand
Clin. 2019;35:1–6.
5. Grandizio LC, Graham J, Klena JC. Current trends in WALANT
surgery: a survey of American Society for Surgery of the Hand
Members. J Hand Surg Glob Online. 2020;2:186–190.
6. Yu J, Ji TA, Craig M, et al. Evidence-based sterility: the evolv-
ing role of eld sterility in skin and minor hand surgery. Plast
Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2019;7:e2481.
7. Hashemi K, Blakeley CJ. Wound infections in day-case hand
surgery: a prospective study. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2004;86:
449–450.
8. Jagodzinski NA, Ibish S, Furniss D. Surgical site infection after
hand surgery outside the operating theatre: a systematic review. J
Hand Surg Eur Vol. 2017;42:289–294.
9. Halvorson AJ, Sechriest VF II, Gravely A, et al. Risk of surgical
site infection after carpal tunnel release performed in an operat-
ing room versus a clinic-based procedure room within a veterans
affairs medical center. Am J Infect Control. 2020;48:173–177.
10. Leblanc MR, Lalonde DH, Thoma A, et al. Is main operat-
ing room sterility really necessary in carpal tunnel surgery? A
multicenter prospective study of minor procedure room eld
sterility surgery. Hand (N Y). 2011;6:60–63.
11. Wide Awake Virtual Reality (WAVR). The surgical experience
re-imagined. Available at https://wideawakevr.com/. Accessed
March 15, 2021.
12. Leblanc MR, Lalonde J, Lalonde DH. A detailed cost and ef-
ciency analysis of performing carpal tunnel surgery in the main
operating room versus the ambulatory setting in Canada. Hand
(N Y). 2007;2:173–178.
13. Rhee PC, Fischer MM, Rhee LS, et al. Cost savings and patient
experiences of a clinic-based, wide-awake hand surgery program
at a military medical center: a critical analysis of the rst 100
procedures. J Hand Surg Am. 2017;42:e139–e147.
14. Tang JB, Xing SG, Ayhan E, Hediger S, Huang S. Impact of wide-
awake local anesthesia no tour niquet on departmental settings,
cost, patient and surgeon satisfaction, and beyond. Hand Clin.
2019;35:29–34.
15. Hoxhallari E, Behr IJ, Bradshaw JS, et al. Virtual reality improves
the patient experience during wide-awake local anesthesia no
tourniquet hand surgery: a single-blind, randomized, prospec-
tive study. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2019;144:408–414.
16. National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN). Surgical site infec-
tion event (SSI). Washington, D.C.: Centres for Disese Control and
Prevention. 2021;1–39.
17. Lalonde DH, Wong A. Dosage of local anesthesia in wide awake
hand surgery. J Hand Surg Am. 2013;38:2025–2028.
18. Eberlin KR, Ring D. Infection after hand surgery. Hand Clin.
2015;31:355–360.
19. Garon MT, Massey P, Chen A, et al. Cost and complications of
percutaneous xation of hand fractures in a procedure room
versus the operating room. Hand (N Y). 2018;13:428–434.
20. Werner BC, Teran VA, Deal DN. Patient-related risk fac-
tors for infection following open carpal tunnel release: an
analysis of over 450,000 medicare patients. J Hand Surg Am.
2018;43:214–219.
21. Aitkenhead AR. Injuries associated with anaesthesia. a global
perspective. Br J Anaesth. 2005;95:95–109.
22. Liu LL, Leung JM. Predicting adverse postoperative outcomes in
patients aged 80 years or older. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2000;48:405–412.
23. Walker MR, Kallingal GJ, Musser JE, et al. Treatment efcacy of
virtual reality distraction in the reduction of pain and anxiety
during cystoscopy. Mil Med. 2014;179:891–896.
24. Mosadeghi S, Reid MW, Martinez B, et al. Feasibility of an
immersive virtual reality intervention for hospitalized patients:
an observational cohort study. JMIR Ment Health. 2016;3:e28.
25. Morris LD, Louw QA, Grimmer-Somers K. The effectiveness
of virtual reality on reducing pain and anxiety in burn injury
patients: a systematic review. Clin J Pain. 2009;25:815–826.
26. Furman E, Jasinevicius TR, Bissada NF, et al. Virtual reality dis-
traction for pain control during periodontal scaling and root
planing procedures. J Am Dent Assoc. 2009;140:1508–1516.
27. van Twillert B, Bremer M, Faber AW. Computer-generated vir-
tual reality to control pain and anxiety in pediatric and adult
burn patients during wound dressing changes. J Burn Care Res.
2007;28:694–702.
28. Arnold MH, Komesaroff P, Kerridge I. Understanding the
ethical implications of the rituals of medicine. Intern Med J.
2020;50:1123–1131.
29. Zhong CB, Liljenquist K. Washing away your sins: threatened
morality and physical cleansing. Science. 2006;313:1451–1452.
30. Clarkson JHW, Kirkpatrick JJ, Lawrie R. Prevention by organi-
zation: the story of no. 4 maxillofacial surgical unit in North
Africa and Italy during the Second World War. Plast Reconstr Surg.
2008;121:657–668.
31. Tanner WE. Sir W. Arbuthnot Lane. His Life and Work. London:
Bailliere, Tindall and Cox; 1946.
Article
Waste in medicine can be defined narrowly by including only physical waste. It can be defined widely by including the concept of wasting time, energy, money and waste of materials. We will provide an overview of waste mitigation and how it can be a union between saving money and protecting the environment.
Article
Full-text available
Purpose To define self-reported WALANT use among American Society for Surgery of the Hand (ASSH) members. We aimed to define surgeon and practice demographics relative to WALANT use and identify potential barriers for WALANT implementation. Methods An anonymous multiple-choice survey was electronically distributed to all active ASSH members. Incomplete surveys were included in the final analysis. Surgeons were asked to provide reasons for not performing WALANT, which were categorized based on general themes. We compared practice and surgeon demographic information relative to WALANT use. Results Of 3,826 ASSH members, 869 responded (23%). A total of 79% of respondents had performed at least one WALANT procedure; 62% currently incorporated WALANT into their practice. Hospital-owned outpatient surgery centers were the most common location for WALANT procedures (31%). Canadian surgeons were more likely to use WALANT, compared with US and international surgeons. Surgeons with fewer years in practice and higher-volume surgeons were more likely to use WALANT. There was no statistically significant association between either practice or income structure and WALANT use. For carpal tunnel release (CTR), 13% did not offer patients WALANT, whereas 43% offered WALANT to all patients. Moreover, 51% of surgeons reported that anesthesia staff was required to be present for WALANT cases at their institution. In determining reasons for not using WALANT, 16% reported that they preferred a tourniquet for visualization. Only 2% had concerns regarding epinephrine use in the hand. Conclusions The results of this survey illustrate current WALANT use among ASSH members and defines the demographics of those employing WALANT. Lack of familiarity with WALANT and an acceptance of the use of epinephrine in the hand has increased from prior ASSH surveys. Lack of familiarity with the technique, concerns regarding operating room efficiency, and patient preferences remain considerable barriers to more widespread adoption of WALANT procedures. Type of study/level of evidence Economic and Decision Analysis V.
Article
Full-text available
Field sterility is commonly used for skin and minor hand surgery performed in the ambulatory setting. Surgical site infection (SSI) rates are similar for these same procedures when performed in the main operating room (OR). In this paper, we aim to look at both current evidence and common sense logic supporting the use of some of the techniques and apparel designed to prevent SSI. This is a literature review of the evidence behind the ability of gloves, masks, gowns, drapes, head covers, footwear, and ventilation systems to prevent SSIs. We used MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PubMed and included literature from the inception of each database up to March 2019. We could not find substantial evidence to support the use of main OR sterility practices such as head covers, gowns, full patient draping, laminar airflow, and footwear to reduce SSIs in skin and minor hand surgery. Field sterility in ambulatory minor procedure rooms outside the main OR is appropriate for most skin and minor hand surgery procedures. SSIs in these procedures are easily treatable with minimal patient morbidity and do not justify the cost and waste associated with the use of main OR sterility.
Article
Full-text available
Background: Carpal tunnel release (CTR) is increasingly performed in a clinic-based procedure room (PR) environment, which is less restrictive than traditional operating rooms (ORs). It is unknown if there is an impact on surgical site infection (SSI) rates. Methods: Records of patients who underwent clean, elective CTR from October 2014 to April 2017 at a single site were identified using Current Procedural Terminology codes and charts reviewed using National Healthcare Safety Network SSI criteria. Procedure type and patient characteristics were assessed with multivariate logistic regression and costs compared using administrative data. Results: A total of 312 procedures were included: 221 in OR and 91 in PR. SSI rate, including revisions, was 2.88% (non revision rate was 2.30%). Unadjusted SSI rate was 3.2% in OR and 2.2% in PR (P = .64). After adjusting for underlying risk factors, procedure setting was not associated with risk of SSI (P = .53; odds ratio, 0.43; 95% confidence interval, 0.03-5.94). Revision CTR was a predictor of SSI (P = .02; odds ratio, 28.21; 95% confidence interval, 1.84-434.57). The mean total cost of CTR in the OR was $4,254.21 and PR was $416.93. Conclusions: There was no significant difference in SSI rates for CTR performed in OR and PR environments. CTRs performed in a PR led to a 10-fold cost savings. Based on our findings of PRs as both safe and cost-effective, we recommend that more facilities explore the use of PRs for CTR.
Article
Full-text available
Wide-awake local anesthesia no tourniquet surgery has been shown to decrease cost and hospital length of stay. The authors studied the use of virtual reality during wide-awake local anesthesia no tourniquet outpatient upper extremity surgery to assess its effect on patient pain, anxiety and fun. Patients undergoing wide-awake local anesthesia no tourniquet surgery were randomized to use (virtual reality) or not use (non-virtual reality) virtual reality during their procedures. Pain, fun, and anxiety were measured with a Likert scale at several time points, as were blood pressure and heart rate. A postoperative questionnaire was used to assess overall satisfaction. Virtual reality patients exhibited lower anxiety scores during injection, during the procedure, and at the end of the procedure. There were no differences in blood pressure, heart rate, or pain scores. Compared with non-virtual reality patients, virtual reality patients' fun scores were higher. Virtual reality patients felt the experience helped them to relax, and they would recommend virtual reality-assisted wide-awake local anesthesia no tourniquet surgery. Among patients with self-reported preexisting anxiety, virtual reality patients had lower pain and anxiety scores during injection of local anesthesia compared with non-virtual reality patients. This study demonstrates that readily available virtual reality hardware and software can provide a virtual reality experience that reduces patient anxiety both during the injection of local anesthesia and during the surgical procedure. (Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 144: 408, 2019.) CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:: Therapeutic, II.
Article
Rituals may be understood broadly as stereotyped behaviours carrying symbolic meanings, which play a crucial role in defining relationships, legitimating authority, giving meaning to certain life events and stabilising social structures. Despite intense interest in the subject, and an extensive literature, relatively little attention has been given to the nature, role and function of ritual in contemporary medicine. Medicine is replete with ritualistic behaviours and imperatives, which play a crucial role in all aspects of clinical practice. Rituals play multiple, complex functions in clinical interactions and have an important role in shaping interactions, experiences and outcomes. Longstanding medical rituals have been disrupted in the wake of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Medical rituals may be evident or invisible, often overlap with or operate alongside instrumentalised practices, and play crucial roles in establishing, maintaining and guaranteeing the efficacy of clinical practices. Rituals can also inhibit progress and change, by enforcing arbitrary authority. Physicians should consider when they are undertaking a ritual practice and recognise when the exigencies of contemporary practice are affecting that ritual with or without meaning or intention. Physicians should reflect on whether aspects of their ritual interactions are undertaken on the basis of sentiment, custom or evidence-based outcomes, and whether rituals should be defended, continued in a modified fashion or even abandoned in favour of new behaviours suitable for and salient with contemporary practice in the interests of patient care.
Article
Injection of tumescent local anesthesia should no longer be painful. WALANT anesthesia, strong sutures, a slightly bulky repair, intraoperative testing of active movement, and judicious venting of the A2 and A4 pulleys improve results in flexor tendon repair. WALANT K wire finger fracture reduction permits intraoperative testing of K wire stability with active movement to facilitate early protected movement at 3 to 5 days after surgery. WALANT can decrease costs and garbage production while increasing accessibility and affordability. Several surgeons have found no infection difference when the K wires are inserted with full operating room sterility versus field sterility.
Article
This article reviews the impact of wide-awake hand surgery without tourniquet on departmental settings and savings on patients’ medical cost, and efficiency of fellowship training and practice of junior hand surgeons in 3 units in 3 countries. The medical cost of the commonly performed procedures is decreased remarkably with this approach in the 3 units. Hand surgery fellowship training and practice of junior surgeons are benefited from this approach in 2 units in Turkey and Switzerland. Overall, this approach improves the surgeons’ and patients’ quality of life and its application is expanding to almost all procedures of hand surgery.
Article
Purpose: To establish the rate of postoperative infection after open carpal tunnel release (CTR) on a national level using an administrative database and define relevant patient-related risk factors associated with its occurrence. Methods: The PearlDiver patient records database was used to query the 100% Medicare Standard Analytic Files retrospectively from 2005 to 2012 for patients undergoing open CTR using Current Procedural Terminology code 64721. Postoperative infection within 90 days of surgery was assessed using both International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision codes for diagnoses of postoperative infection or pyogenic arthritis of the wrist and Current Procedural Terminology codes for procedures for these indications, including either open or arthroscopic irrigation and debridement. We used a multivariable binomial logistic regression model that allows for assessment of the independent effect of a variable while controlling for remaining variables to evaluate which patient demographics and medical comorbidities were associated with an increased risk for postoperative infection. Adjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were calculated for each risk factor, with P < .05 considered statistically significant. Results: A total of 454,987 patients met all inclusion and exclusion criteria. Of these patients, 1,466 developed a postoperative infection, corresponding to an infection rate of 0.32%. Independent positive risk factors for infection included younger age, male sex, obesity (body mass index of 30 to 40), morbid obesity (body mass index greater than 40), tobacco use, alcohol use, and numerous medical comorbidities including diabetes, inflammatory arthritis, peripheral vascular disease, chronic liver disease, chronic kidney disease, chronic lung disease, and depression. Conclusions: The current study reinforced conventional wisdom regarding the the overall low infection rate after CTR and revealed numerous patient-related risk factors that are independently associated with an increased risk of infection after open CTR in patients enrolled in Medicare. Type of study/level of evidence: Prognostic II.
Article
Background: The purpose of this study was to compare closed reduction and percutaneous pinning of metacarpal and phalanx fractures performed in the operating room (OR) versus the procedure room of the emergency department with primary outcomes being infection rate, radiographic union, and monetary cost. Methods: From January 2006 to December 2010, all closed reduction and percutaneous pinnings of metacarpal and phalanx fractures (CPT codes: 26608; 26727) by a single board-certified hand surgeon (A.M.H.) were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were placed into 2 groups: Group 1 was patients treated in the OR, and group 2 was patients in an emergency department procedure room. Infection, malunion, and nonunion rates were compared using a chi-square test. Charges were compared using a t-test, and cost of supplies and labor was evaluated. Results: A total of 189 patients met final inclusion criteria for this study: 130 in group 1 and 59 in group 2. There was no statistically significant difference in infection rates ( P = .13), nonunion ( P = .40), malunion rates ( P = .89), and hardware failure with revision ( P = .94) between the 2 groups. The procedure room patients had an average hospital charge of $1358.55 compared with $3691.85 for OR-treated patients (P = .001). The total cost of supplies and nonphysician labor was $432.31 per OR case and $179.59 per procedure room case. Conclusions: Metacarpal and phalanx fractures of the hand amendable to closed reduction and percutaneous pinning can be treated in the procedure room with no increase in risk of infection, malunion, or nonunion rates. In addition, these surgeries can be performed in a procedure room with lower cost and less charges to patients than in the operating room.
Article
We carried out a systematic review to determine the incidence of infection for hand surgery done in settings other than the operating theatre. Databases were searched and a PRISMA chart created by three independent reviewers. From 1200 studies identified, 46 full text articles were reviewed and six were included (two Level 3 studies and four Level 4). In three studies there were no infections after surgery in an office, procedure room or emergency department. Two studies with a combined number of 1962 procedures reviewed carpal tunnel decompressions and reported identical infection rates of 0.4%. Although the current evidence is of poor quality, it suggests that some types of hand surgery may be done outside the operating theatre without increasing the risk of infection. Level of evidence: IV