Clinicians' and Patients' Experiences and Perceptions on the Prevention and Management of Surgical Site Infections: A Mixed-Methods Systematic Review.
Eliza Humphrey, Adam Burston, Elizabeth McInnes and 3 others
PMID 39578411WHAT IT FOUND
Clinicians and surgical patients described outdated wound-care guidelines, knowledge gaps, poor communication, weak infection feedback, and distressing post-surgery infections as key issues in preventing and managing surgical site infections.
Key findings
01Clinicians and patients identified outdated or insufficiently detailed guidelines as a reason for non-adherence to SSI prevention and management.
02Nurses and physicians reported knowledge deficits in wound assessment, documentation, and antibiotic prophylaxis, leading to inconsistent practice.
03Patients described pain, malodour, helplessness, social isolation, financial costs, and poor support after discharge when dealing with SSI.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for RNs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
Only English peer-reviewed studies from acute hospital wards were included, so it may not apply to intensive care, outpatient, palliative, primary or community settings. Several included studies had unclear qualitative data-collection methods, survey nonresponse bias, unrepresentative samples, or unclear mixed-methods integration. The review synthesises perceptions and experiences, not tested effects on SSI rates or patient outcomes. Some included studies did not clarify whether 'guidelines' meant international, national, local or mixed documents. Comparisons between disciplines were limited in some studies because participants' health disciplines were not clearly reported.
Declared interests
The authors declared no conflicts of interest.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read these themes as proof that updating guidelines or educating nurses reduces surgical site infections. The review reports perceptions and barriers, not tested intervention effects.