Comparison of superficial surgical site infection following use of diathermy and scalpel for making skin incision in inguinal hernioplasty.
Journal - Nigerian journal of clinical practice (Nigeria )
BACKGROUND: The method of making surgical incision remains a complex problem. Although controversial, the use of diathermy instead of scalpel for skin incision and underlying tissue dissection is gradually gaining wide acceptance. This is due to the observation that no change in wound complication rate or postoperative pain is reported with the use ofDiathermy. However, the fear ofexcessive scarring and poor wound healing has curtailed its widespread use for skin incision. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study is to compare superficial surgical site infection (SSSI) in diathermy and scalpel skin incision in inguinal hernioplasty. STUDY DESIGN: Quasi experimental study. Place and Duration of Study: Study was conducted at Surgical Unit II, Holy Family Hospital. Rawalpindi from 1st Jan. 2008 to 30th September 2008. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 80 patients who presented with inguinal hernias were included in the study. Patients were divided in two groups. Group1: In 40 patients skin incision was made with Diathermy, Group 2: The other 40 had skin incision with scalpel. RESULTS: The mean age of patients in the intervention group (Group 1) was 50 years while in the control group (Group 2) it was 46 years. 48% patients in Group 1 and 55% in the Group 2 had indirect inguinal hernias. SSSI was noted in 12.5% cases in Group 1 whereas in Group 2 it was 17.5% but this difference was not found to be statistically significant (p value=0.378). CONCLUSION: The use of diathermy for making skin incisions is as safe as scalpel and there is no significant difference amongst both regarding wound infection.