Surgical-Site Infections in Mexico

for the 80% oxygen group) may wonder after reading the Grief paper, while munching bagels in some doctors' lounge, whether they should immediately embrace the amazing new adjunct. Who does not want to be au courant? At my institution, the wound-infection rate for colon resection over the past 10 years (3.8%) has been measured by a rigid program of continuous, global, 30-day infection surveillance that does not depend upon culture results as confirmatory or exculpatory data. Should I and my partners add 80% oxygen prophylaxis for all colon resections starting tomorrow? If we do, how will we know if we used it correctiy or if it had any benefit? Maybe most surgical patients at every hospital should receive 80% oxygen under the inspiration of "can't hurt, might help." There are not going to be easy answers here, but we may surmise that orders for 80% oxygen and purchases of the special masks will increase across the land real soon. I also predict much premature joy at any hospital where the natural up-down cycling of surveillance infection rates (ie, random process noise) just happens to be in its "down" mode after 80% oxygen use begins. Remember, we will be using this adjunct under nonresearch conditions, with the outcome data being estimated infection rates that come from surveillance programs already battling numerous issues of case-finding sensitivity, uniformity, and personnel budget crimps. The post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy will be an uninvited visitor at infection control conferences.