The DOI matches its Crossref record; 59 of the 59 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Surgical Site Infection Prevention: A Review
Abstract
Importance: Approximately 0.5% to 3% of patients undergoing surgery will experience infection at or adjacent to the surgical incision site. Compared with patients undergoing surgery who do not have a surgical site infection, those with a surgical site infection are hospitalized approximately 7 to 11 days longer. Observations: Most surgical site infections can be prevented if appropriate strategies are implemented. These infections are typically caused when bacteria from the patient’s endogenous flora are inoculated into the surgical site at the time of surgery. Development of an infection depends on various factors such as the health of the patient’s immune system, presence of foreign material, degree of bacterial wound contamination, and use of antibiotic prophylaxis. Although numerous strategies are recommended by international organizations to decrease surgical site infection, only 6 general strategies are supported by randomized trials. Interventions that are associated with lower rates of infection include avoiding razors for hair removal (4.4% with razors vs 2.5% with clippers); decolonization with intranasal antistaphylococcal agents and antistaphylococcal skin antiseptics for high-risk procedures (0.8% with decolonization vs 2% without); use of chlorhexidine gluconate and alcohol-based skin preparation (4.0% with chlorhexidine gluconate plus alcohol vs 6.5% with povidone iodine plus alcohol); maintaining normothermia with active warming such as warmed intravenous fluids, skin warming, and warm forced air to keep the body temperature warmer than 36 °C (4.7% with active warming vs 13% without); perioperative glycemic control (9.4% with glucose <150 mg/dL vs 16% with glucose >150 mg/dL); and use of negative pressure wound therapy (9.7% with vs 15% without). Guidelines recommend appropriate dosing, timing, and choice of preoperative parenteral antimicrobial prophylaxis. Conclusions and Relevance: Surgical site infections affect approximately 0.5% to 3% of patients undergoing surgery and are associated with longer hospital stays than patients with no surgical site infections. Avoiding razors for hair removal, maintaining normothermia, use of chlorhexidine gluconate plus alcohol–based skin preparation agents, decolonization with intranasal antistaphylococcal agents and antistaphylococcal skin antiseptics for high-risk procedures, controlling for perioperative glucose concentrations, and using negative pressure wound therapy can reduce the rate of surgical site infections.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
A surgical safety checklist to reduce morbidity and mortality in a global population
Haynes, A. B., Weiser, T. G., Berry, W. R., Lipsitz, S. R., Breizat, A.-H. S., Dellinger, E. P., Herbosa, T., Joseph, S., Kibatala, P. L., Lapitan, M. C. M., et al. (2009) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmsa0810119 · Cited by 5,688
Guideline for Prevention of Surgical Site Infection, 1999
Mangram, A. J., Horan, T. C., Pearson, M. L., Silver, L. C., Jarvis, W. R., & The Hospital Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee (1999) · Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology · doi:10.1086/501620 · Cited by 4,595
Multistate point-prevalence survey of health care-associated infections
Magill, S. S., Edwards, J. R., Bamberg, W., Beldavs, Z. G., Dumyati, G., Kainer, M. A., Lynfield, R., Maloney, M., McAllister-Hollod, L., Nadle, J., et al. (2014) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1306801 · Cited by 3,931
Berríos-Torres, S. I., Umscheid, C. A., Bratzler, D. W., Leas, B., Stone, E. C., Kelz, R. R., Reinke, C. E., Morgan, S., Solomkin, J. S., Mazuski, J. E., et al. (2017) · JAMA Surgery · doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2017.0904 · Cited by 3,569
Kurz, A., Sessler, D. I., & Lenhardt, R. (1996) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199605093341901 · Cited by 2,760
Clinical practice guidelines for antimicrobial prophylaxis in surgery
Bratzler, D. W., Dellinger, E. P., Olsen, K. M., Perl, T. M., Auwaerter, P. G., Bolon, M. K., Fish, D. N., Napolitano, L. M., Sawyer, R. G., Slain, D., et al. (2013) · American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy · doi:10.2146/ajhp120568 · Cited by 2,591
HALEY, R. W., CULVER, D. H., WHITE, J. W., MORGAN, W. M., EMORI, T. G., MUNN, V. P., & HOOTON, T. M. (1985) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a113990 · Cited by 2,038
Zimlichman, E., Henderson, D., Tamir, O., Franz, C., Song, P., Yamin, C. K., Keohane, C., Denham, C. R., & Bates, D. W. (2013) · JAMA Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.9763 · Cited by 1,847
Chlorhexidine–Alcohol versus Povidone–Iodine for Surgical-Site Antisepsis
Darouiche, R. O., Wall, M. J., Itani, K. M. F., Otterson, M. F., Webb, A. L., Carrick, M. M., Miller, H. J., Awad, S. S., Crosby, C. T., Mosier, M. C., et al. (2010) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa0810988 · Cited by 1,486
Strategies to Prevent Surgical Site Infections in Acute Care Hospitals: 2014 Update
Anderson, D. J., Podgorny, K., Berríos-Torres, S. I., Bratzler, D. W., Dellinger, E. P., Greene, L., Nyquist, A.-C., Saiman, L., Yokoe, D. S., Maragakis, L. L., et al. (2014) · Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology · doi:10.1086/676022 · Cited by 1,216
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Seidelman, J. L., Mantyh, C. R., & Anderson, D. J.
- Venue
- JAMA
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2023-01-17
- Volume
- 329
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 244
- ISSN
- 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
- 0098-7484
- OpenAlex
- W4316927603
- Cited by
- 553
- References
- 59
- FWCI
- 131.89
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Surgical Site Infection Prevention: A Review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.2022.24075
- The paper
- Seidelman, J. L., Mantyh, C. R., & Anderson, D. J. (2023). Surgical Site Infection Prevention: A Review. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2022.24075
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.