Key result
Implementation of Six Sigma methodology significantly improved the rate of perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis administration within 60 minutes before incision from 38% to 86% (P < 0.01).
Why the study?
Does Six Sigma methodology improve adherence to the timing of perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery?
Population
2,331 patients undergoing noncardiac surgery (615 pre-intervention, 1,716 post-intervention)
Comparison
Six Sigma methodology implementation including… vs Pre-intervention standard process
Design
Cohort
Follow-up
8 months
Authors
Loading...
Supports quality improvement for antibiotic timing in noncardiac surgery; leaves open need for randomized confirmation of durability and generalizability.
Does Six Sigma methodology improve adherence to the timing of perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery?
Absolute Event Rate: 86% vs 38%
p-value: p=< 0.01
Implementation of Six Sigma methodology significantly improved adherence to optimal timing for perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis in noncardiac surgery.
Parker et al. (2006) studied Noncardiac surgery (n=2,331). Six Sigma methodology vs. Preintervention process was evaluated on Administration of perioperative antimicrobial prophylaxis within <=60 min before incision (p=< 0.01). Implementation of Six Sigma methodology significantly improved the rate of perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis administration within 60 minutes before incision from 38% to 86% (P < 0.01).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: