Article Sidebar

PDF
Date Published: 10/12/2025
Abstract Views: 24
Views PDF: 11
DOI: 10.56535/jmpm.v50si4.1646
Issue
Vol. 50 No. si4 (2025): JOURNAL OF MILITARY PHARMACO-MEDICINE - SPECIAL ISSUE 12/2025
Section
Special issue celebrating the 75th anniversary of Military Hospital 103
How to Cite
Nguyen, V. D., Nguyen, D. T., Nguyen, T. M., Nguyen, T. A. L., & Vu, H. T. (2025). EVALUATION OF THE OUTCOMES OF PROPHYLACTIC ANTIBIOTIC USE IN ORTHOPEDIC TRAUMA SURGERY. Journal of Military Pharmaco-medicine, 50(si4), 593-600. https://doi.org/10.56535/jmpm.v50si4.1646

EVALUATION OF THE OUTCOMES OF PROPHYLACTIC ANTIBIOTIC USE IN ORTHOPEDIC TRAUMA SURGERY

Van Duy Nguyen1, Dinh Thanh Nguyen1, Thi Mai Nguyen1, Thi Ai Lien Nguyen1, Huu Trung Vu1,
1 Khoa Chấn thương chung và Vi phẫu, Bệnh viện Quân y 103, Học viện Quân y

Main Article Content

Abstract

Objectives: To evaluate the outcomes of prophylactic antibiotic (PAB) use in orthopedic trauma surgery. Methods: A descriptive, longitudinal study without a control group was conducted on 293 patients undergoing clean surgery at the Department of General Trauma and Microsurgery, Military Hospital 103 from March to July 2025. All patients received preoperative Cefazolin according to the Ministry of Health’s PAB guidelines. Clinical signs of surgical site infection (SSI) were monitored for at least 7 days postoperatively. Results: 281 patients (95.9%) showed no signs of infection and did not require additional antibiotic treatment. 5 patients (1.7%) were assessed as high risk and received additional antibiotic therapy, but no actual infections were recorded. 7 patients (2.4%) developed superficial SSIs; no deep infections were observed. Conclusion: PAB use of Cefazolin according to the standard regimen significantly reduced the rate of postoperative infections in orthopedic trauma surgery. Integrating aseptic control, postoperative care, and close monitoring plays a vital role in infection prevention strategies.

Keywords

Prophylactic antibiotics, Surgical site infection, Orthopedic trauma, Cefazolin

Article Details

References

1. Mangram AJ. Guideline for prevention of surgical site infection, 1999. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Hospital infection control practices advisory committee. Am J Infect Control. 1999; 27(2):97-132; quiz 133-4; discussion 96.
2. Solomkin JS. Global guidelines for the prevention of surgical site infection. The Lancet Infectious Diseases. 2016; 16:e276-e87.
3. Liu H. Risk factors for deep surgical site infections following orthopedic trauma surgery: A meta-analysis and systematic review. Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research. 2024; 19(1):811.
4. Jevsevar DS and E Abt. The new AAOS-ADA clinical practice guideline on prevention of orthopaedic implant infection in patients undergoing dental procedures. JAAOS - Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. 2013; 21(3):195-197.
5. Bộ Y tế. Hướng dẫn sử dụng kháng sinh (Ban hành theo quyết định số708/QĐ-BYT ngày 02 tháng 03 năm 2015). Nhà xuất bản Y học, Hà Nội. 2015.
6. Cheng J. Prevalence of surgical site infection and risk factors in patients after foot and ankle surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int Wound J. 2024; 21(1):e14350.
7. Whitehouse JD. The impact of surgical-site infections following orthopedic surgery at a community hospital and a university hospital: Adverse quality of life, excess length of stay, and extra cost. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2002; 23(4):183-189.
8. Allegranzi B. New WHO recommendations on preoperative measures for surgical site infection prevention: An evidence-based global perspective. Lancet Infect Dis. 2016; 16(12):e276-e287.