Merve Akın1, Serdar Topaloğlu2, Hakan Özel1, Fatih M. Avşar1, Tezcan Akın1, Erdal Polat3, Erdem Karabulut4, Süleyman Hengirmen5

1Clinic of General Surgery, Ankara City Hospital, Ankara, Turkey
2Department of General Surgery, Karadeniz Technical University Faculty of Medicine, Trabzon, Turkey
3Clinic of Gastroenterological Surgery, Kartal Koşuyolu High Speciality Educational And Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
4Department of Biostatics, Hacettepe University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey
5Clinic of General Surgery, Ankara Numune Training and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey


Objective: Various surveillance methods have been described for surveillance of surgical site infections (SSI). The aim of this study was to examine prac- ticality of SSI risk assessment methods (SENIC and NNIS) with a postoperative wound monitoring scale (ASEPSIS) as an outcome assessment measure and evaluation of the contribution of wound assesment to the reduction of wound infection.

Material and Methods: Patients were followed with a prospective data chart through four year. Correlation of SENIC and NNIS together with ASEPSIS were performed.

Results: During the study period, 275 SSI occurred. SSIs were determined within the 21 days-period after operations. Correlation between SENIC with ASEPSIS (rs= 0.41, p< 0.001) was found better than that for NNIS with ASEPSIS (rs= 0.37, p< 0.001). Type of operation (emergency vs. elective), body mass index, operation class and American Society of Anesthesiologists scores were found independently predictive factors for SSI. The forth year SSI rate was found to be significantly lower than the other years (p< 0.001).

Conclusion: This study indicates weak but significant correlation between preoperative risk assessment methods for SSI and ASEPSIS method. In addi- tion, surgical wound assesment and awarness of the wound infection rates, have decreased the SSI rates over the years.

Keywords: Asepsis, senic, SSI, nnis


Ethics Committee Approval

The approval for this study was obtained from Ankara City Hospital No. 1 Clinical Research Ethics Committee (Decision No: E1-21-1643, Date: 17.03.2021).

Peer Review

Externally peer-reviewed.

Author Contributions

Concept - M.A., S.T.; Design - S.T., M.A., E.P.; Supervision - S.T., F.M.A., S.H.; Materials - M.A., T.A.; Data Collection and/or Processing - M.A., E.P.; Analysis and/or Interpratation - E.K. Literature Review - M.A.; Writing Manuscript - M.A., S.T.; Critical Reviews - S.T., S.H.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Financial Disclosure

The authors declared that this study has received no financial support.