Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

BACKGROUND: Surgical site infection (SSI) is a major burden on patients and health systems. This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of routine change of sterile gloves and instruments before abdominal wall closure to prevent SSI. METHODS: A decision-analytic model was built to estimate average costs and outcomes of changing gloves and instruments before abdominal wall closure compared with current practice. Clinical data were obtained from the ChEETAh trial, a multicentre, cluster-randomised trial in seven low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs), and costs were obtained from a study (KIWI) that assessed costs associated with SSIs in LMICs. Outcomes were measured as the percentage of surgeries resulting in SSIs. Costs were measured from a health-care provider perspective and were reported in 2021 US$. The economic analysis used a partially split single-country costing approach, with pooled outcomes data from all seven countries in the ChEETAh trial, and data for resource use and unit costs from India (KIWI); secondary analyses used resource use and costs from Mexico and Ghana (KIWI). FINDINGS: In the base case, the average cost of the intervention was $259∙92 compared with $261∙10 for current practice (cost difference -$1∙18, 95% CI -4∙08 to 1∙33). In the intervention group, an estimated 17∙6% of patients had an SSI compared with 19∙7% of patients in the current practice group (absolute risk reduction 2∙10%, 95% CI 2∙07-2∙84). At all cost-effectiveness thresholds assumed ($0 to $14 000), the intervention had a higher likelihood of being cost-effective compared with current practice, indicating that the intervention was cost-effective. Similar results were obtained when the analysis using data from India was repeated using resource use and unit cost data from Mexico and Ghana. INTERPRETATION: Routine sterile glove and instrument change before abdominal wall closure is effective and the costs are similar to those for current practice. Routine change of gloves and instruments before abdominal wall closure should be rolled out in LMICs. FUNDING: National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Clinician Scientist Award, NIHR Global Health Research Unit Grant, and Mölnlycke Healthcare.

Original publication

DOI

10.1016/S2214-109X(23)00538-7

Type

Journal article

Journal

Lancet glob health

Publication Date

02/2024

Volume

12

Pages

e235 - e242

Keywords

Humans, Abdominal Wound Closure Techniques, Cost-Effectiveness Analysis, Developing Countries, Surgical Wound Infection, Pragmatic Clinical Trials as Topic, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Multicenter Studies as Topic