Next Article in Journal
Study on the Spatial Interaction between Urban Economic and Ecological Environment—A Case Study of Wuhan City
Previous Article in Journal
Electroencephalography-Based Neuroemotional Responses in Cognitively Normal and Cognitively Impaired Elderly by Watching the Ardisia mamillata Hance with Fruits and without Fruits
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Risk Factors Analysis of Surgical Infection Using Artificial Intelligence: A Single Center Study

1
Department of Public Health, University of Naples “Federico II”, 80100 Naples, Italy
2
Interdepartmental Center for Research in Health Care Management and Innovation in Health Care (CIRMIS), University of Naples “Federico II”, 80100 Naples, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19(16), 10021; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191610021
Submission received: 11 July 2022 / Revised: 8 August 2022 / Accepted: 12 August 2022 / Published: 14 August 2022
(This article belongs to the Section Global Health)

Abstract

:
Background: Surgical site infections (SSIs) have a major role in the evolution of medical care. Despite centuries of medical progress, the management of surgical infection remains a pressing concern. Nowadays, the SSIs continue to be an important factor able to increase the hospitalization duration, cost, and risk of death, in fact, the SSIs are a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in modern health care. Methods: A study based on statistical test and logistic regression for unveiling the association between SSIs and different risk factors was carried out. Successively, a predictive analysis of SSIs on the basis of risk factors was performed. Results: The obtained data demonstrated that the level of surgery contamination impacts significantly on the infection rate. In addition, data also reveals that the length of postoperative hospital stay increases the rate of surgical infections. Finally, the postoperative length of stay, surgery department and the antibiotic prophylaxis with 2 or more antibiotics are a significant predictor for the development of infection. Conclusions: The data report that the type of surgery department and antibiotic prophylaxis there are a statistically significant predictor of SSIs. Moreover, KNN model better handle the imbalanced dataset (48 infected and 3983 healthy), observing highest accuracy value.

1. Introduction

Healthcare associated infections (HAI) are among the major complications of modern medical therapy [1]. The most important HAIs are those related to invasive devices: central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSI), catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTI), ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) as well as surgical site infections (SSI). Surgical site infections (SSIs) are infections that arise after surgery and can affect the skin, an organ and part of the body [2]. The last ECDC Report for SSIs shows that in 2017, 10.149 SSIs were reported using patient-based or unit-based surveillance. Of these 47% were superficial, 30% deep and 22% organ/space SSIs. Thirty-four per cent of the SSIs were diagnosed in hospitals, whereas 52% were detected after discharge [3]. The reported prevalence ranges from 0.5% to 10.1% [3]. The latest Italian HAI prevalence study reports a prevalence of 8.03%. Of these infections, 16% were SSIs with a prevalence of 1.27% [4].
Most of the surgical site infections (SSIs) arise in secondary care and are often associated with antibiotic-resistant organisms, such as methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. A long list of potential patient’s risk factors for SSI has been identified, but few have been confirmed as such in randomized clinical trials. SSIs represent about a fifth of all healthcare-associated infections [5]. The SSIs cost usually is defined as hospital charges for additional goods and resources. In patients with SSI, costs are divided into direct and indirect. Direct costs include prolonged hospitalization and readmission to the hospital, outpatient visits, visits to the emergency department, additional surgery, and prolonged antibiotic therapy, while the indirect costs are difficult to quantify because they include lost productivity not only by the patient but also by family members or friends. For this reason, the true cost of an SSI often is unknown [6]. There are multiple factors contributing to HAI and including healthcare associated factors, environmental factors, and patient-related factors. Healthcare factors include the use of invasive devices, the type of surgery surgical procedures and pressure from excessive antibiotic use as prophylaxis. The environmental factors include contaminated air-conditioning systems and the physical layout of the facility (e.g., open units with beds close together). Patient’s related factors include genetic factors, the severity of underlying illness, use of immunosuppressive agents and prolonged hospital stays.
It is recognized now that many SSIs are partially preventable and that healthcare can become safer. A passive strategy can be used for SSI reduction in which surveillance protocols lead to infection reduction through timely and timely feedback [7]. The classic study that demonstrated the importance of this was the SENIC study, funded by the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and included 338 randomly selected hospitals stratified by geography, bed capacity and teaching status. The work showed that infection control programs with dedicated hospital epidemiologists and surveillance programs reduced nosocomial infections by 32% compared to facilities without infection control programs [8]. To design an effective prevention program, it is necessary to consider the impact that SSIs have on the length of hospital stay [9,10,11,12], which is a performance indicator of the quality of health processes [13,14,15,16,17,18,19]. In addition, identifying risk factors associated with SSIs can help reduce the incidence of SSIs [11,20] and add value to HTA studies, which are widely used to support health decision-making [21,22,23,24,25]. This paper presents a logistic regression model to study the impact that different clinical, demographic and organizational factors have on the risk of occurrence of SSIs in a surgery department and an AI model to predict the risk of infection has been used.

2. Materials and Methods

The study population include all patients that underwent surgery at the surgical departments of the “Federico II” University Hospital in Naples (Italy) between 2015 and 2019. Active, patient-based surveillance for surgical site infection (SSIs) is continually performed by trained healthcare staff in all surgery departments of the Hospital. The Protocol adopted in the Campania Region for the surveillance of SSIs corresponds to that of the SNICh national surveillance system [26,27]. It defines which interventions to monitor, how and for how long to carry out surveillance, it indicates the information to be collected for each intervention, provides definitions for each of the variables of interest, such as diagnosis of surgical site infection, class and type of intervention, duration of intervention, ASA score, risk index, etc. Data collection is carried out prospectively for all patients undergoing selected surgical interventions. All patients who meet the inclusion criteria in the chosen surveillance period (1 year) are included without any selection. Patients must be supervised, if necessary, even after discharge, for a period of 30 days after surgery in the case of surgical interventions that do not involve the placement of prostheses; the follow-up must be continued for 90 days for patients undergoing interventions with prosthetic material implantation. The ICAARO web IT platform has been implemented since 2015. All companies in the Campania Region can access the platform and manage data from the surveillance of Infections Related to Assistance. ICAARO web allows direct entry of data collected as part of surveillance activities, as well as the extraction of specific reports for each surveillance [27].
For this study, no patients’ informed consent, nor local Ethical Committee authorization was required, as all the data come from HAIs surveillance that is regulated by the Regional Health Authority as defined in the Regional Plan for Healthcare-associated infections Prevention and Control [28]. Data were collected retrospectively using ICARO web IT reports and QuaniSDO, i.e., the system employed for the computerization of hospital discharge records,. A risk folder must be completed for all patients hospitalized from the time of admission to discharge. This folder contains epidemiological data important for the study of hospital infections. All diabetic patients and patients treated with corticosteroids were excluded because these two conditions slow wound healing and predispose to bacterial infections. The information, extracted from medical records, are the following:
  • Gender (male/female);
  • Age;
  • Length of stay (days);
  • Hospital regime;
  • Surgery department;
  • Number of antibiotics;
  • SSI (yes/no).
In accordance with the definition of the National Nosocomial Infection Surveillance System (NNIS), surgical site infection (SSI) is defined as an infection that occurs within 30 days of surgery (or within 1 year if thereafter an implant is left in place during the surgical procedure, i.e., an implantable foreign body, of non-human origin) and which may involve the incisional or deep tissue at the site of the surgery [29].
All data relating to the SSIs were collected by the surgeon who performed the surgery. The surgeon also supervised the patient both during hospitalization and for a period of 30 days following discharge, as recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) criteria [2]. Post-operative follow-up could be done during an outpatient visit or by telephone interview. In addition, upon discharge, each patient received a pre-printed questionnaire, in order to record the onset of any symptoms of HAI (Hospital Acquired Infections) during the follow-up period.

2.1. Statistical Analysis

Before performing the statistical tests, the distributions were analyzed using the Shapiro-Francia test. For parameter age and parameter length of stay, the test showed a non-normal distribution. For this reason, non-parametric tests were used. Specifically, Kruskal-Wallis and statistic tests have been implemented to obtain population characteristics. The Kruskal-Wallis test is a rank-based nonparametric test that can be used to determine if there are statistically significant differences between two or more groups of an independent variable on a continuous or ordinal dependent variable. A p-value below the threshold of 0.05 was considered significant for the above tests [30,31,32,33,34,35].
Logistic regressions were used to test the association between the SSIs (as dependent variable) and the different risk factors under study (as explanatory variables). The explanatory variables are: sex, age, hospital regime, surgery department, length of preoperative and postoperative hospital stay and antibiotic prophylaxis. The multivariate model was adjusted on the risk factors considered. Associations were deemed significant if p-values were below the threshold of 0.05. Sensitivity analyses were performed using Firth’s penalized maximum likelihood logistic regression. Data were analyzed using STATA version 15.

2.2. Predictive Analysis

Machine learning algorithms are learning functions that allow mapping input variables to an output value with the aim of making predictions. This initial learning task allows to subsequently classify given new samples of the same input variables. Different Artificial Intelligence models are used: Random Forest (RF), Logistic Regression (LR), Decision Tree (DT), K-Nearest Neighbors (KNN), Gradient Boosted Tree (GBT), XGBoost (XGB) and Naive Bayes (NB). The target value (SSI) is influenced by the input variables. Starting from the knowledge acquired through the analysis of the initial set of data called training, the model was built. For this reason, the dataset was divided into training (75%) and test (25%) sets. Since the dataset was unbalanced in terms of the presence of infections, the Synthetic Minority Over-sampling Technique (SMOTE) was used [36]. Some supervised learning algorithms (such as decision trees and neural networks) require an equal distribution of classes to generalize well, i.e., to achieve good classification performance. In case of unbalanced input data, e.g., there are only a few objects of the “active” class but many of the “inactive” class, this node adjusts the distribution of classes by adding artificial rows (in the example adding rows for the “active” class).
The algorithm works approximately as follows: It creates synthetic rows by extrapolating between a real object of a given class (in the above example “active”) and one of its nearest neighbors (of the same class). It then chooses a point along the line between these two objects and determines the attributes (cell values) of the new object based on this randomly chosen point.

3. Results

3.1. Statistical Analysis

In this section, we report the performed statistical analysis in order to investigate the correlation between different factors (independent variables) and the risk of infection (dependent variable). Data include a total of 4031 patients that underwent surgery at the surgery department of the “Federico II” University Hospital in Naples (Italy). Patients affected by SSIs underwent surgery in ordinary hospitalization, precisely, in maxillofacial or orthopedic surgery, had longer preoperative and postoperative LOS, and were undergoing therapy with 2 or more antibiotics (Table 1).
This section may be divided into subheadings. It should provide a concise and precise description of the experimental results, their interpretation, as well as the experimental conclusions that can be drawn.
Table 1 shows that except for sex, all variables chosen to conduct this study are statistically significant.
The Kruskal-Wallis test revealed that there is a statistically significant difference between the different groups of the independent variable. The significance level is p = 0.0026 for age and p = 0.001 for LOS, which are below 0.05. Multivariate analyses confirmed that maxillofacial, orthopedics and antibiotic prophylaxis with 2 or more antibiotics were significant predictors of suffering from SSIs (Table 2).

3.2. Predictive Analysis

In this section, a predictive analysis was performed based on several risk factors that were initially normalized and then processed to predict whether or not a patient had SSIs. The results obtained from the predictive analysis were evaluated in terms of accuracy, precision, sensitivity, specificity and F-measure.
A c c u r a c y = N u m b e r   o f   c o r r e c t   p r e d i c t i o n s T o t a l   n u m b e r   o f   p r e d i c t i o n s
m e a s u r e = 2 ( p r e c i s i o n r e c a l l ) p r e c i s i o n + r e c a l l
The performances of selected ML algorithms were analyzed. The table shows the results obtained.
The best performance has been obtained with RF, DT and KNN (Table 3).
In this case, the best algorithm selected has been KNN for its simple structure compared with RF and DT. The confusion matrix of these tree algorithms has been reported in Table 4, Table 5 and Table 6.

3.3. Global Feature Importance

Feature importance is calculated by counting how many times it has been selected for a split and at which rank (level) among all available features (candidates) in the trees of the random forest. A higher value indicates higher feature importance.
Figure 1 shows that the hospitalization regime is the most important feature of all, followed by preoperative LOS and department. Sex seems to be the characteristic that affects infections the least.

4. Discussion

The factors that most influence the risk of SSIs were evaluated in order to study the unbalanced datasets, where the size of the class “infected patients” was lower than that of the “un-infected patients” and for this reason the “Firth’s penalized maximum likelihood logistic regression” was used, in fact, this type of regression is well-suited for unbalanced datasets and for the regression analysis of rare events. The obtained results demonstrated how the level of contamination of the type of surgery can impact significantly the infection rate (p-value < 0.005) since it is obvious that Maxillo-facial and Orthopedics surgery has a higher risk of provoking infections. In the scientific literature, in fact, several studies report that surgical procedures in the Maxillo-Facial area are at high risk of infection. For example, Cunha et al. [37] discuss the risk of infection for head and neck oncological surgery, while Cousin et al. [38] for orthognathic surgery.
In addition, the length of preoperative hospital stay cannot increase the rate of surgical infections (p-value = 0.071). In fact, it is known that the length of post-operative stay and the risk of infection are correlated. Mujagic et al. [12] show that although there is no significant independent association between preoperative length of stay and risk of SSI, postoperative LOS were significantly associated with SSI. The latter is also confirmed by the various studies reviewed by Manoukian et al. [39]. With regard to orthopaedic surgery, there is evidence of an increase in infection levels due to Enterobacteriaceae, together with high use of hip and knee replacement surgery and an increasingly obese surgical population, for which there is a higher risk [40].
Furthermore, data revealed that antibiotic prophylaxis is a possible determining factor, particularly, the prophylaxis with 2 or more antibiotics is the most significant predictor of the model (p-value = 0.004). This is likely to be related to the characteristics of patients who are prescribed combined antibiotic therapies and who are more fragile. This result is in line with what Nasuzione et al. [41] reported on patients with chronic kidney disease. Hawn et al. [42], on the other hand, show that the risk of SSI varies with patient and procedure factors, as well as antibiotic properties, but is not significantly associated with the prophylactic timing of the antibiotic.
In general, the study of risk factors for SSIs has been analyzed in several articles. Fisichella et al. [43] show that for orthopedic surgery there is a correlation with age, contrary to our study, and with diabetes and smoking. Among these, diabetes is then also significantly correlated with SSI risk for cardiothoracic surgery, as shown by Latham et al. [44].
In sum, the goal of the work is to increase the knowledge of health professionals on such an important topic as SSIs. In particular, classic statistical analysis is combined with the construction of predictive algorithms to determine whether or not a patient is suffering from an infection. Although the use of Machine Learning in this field is not new, e.g., Montella et al. [45] have already used it to study healthcare-associated bloodstream infection in neonatal intentional care or Tunthanathip et al. [46] specifically for neurosurgical operation, in our work we analyze the situation of the whole hospital by including both organizational and clinical-demographic factors of the patients. Knowing a priori through these algorithms the risk of SSI could have a direct impact on the care practices implemented by the hospital.
The limitations of our work are several. One of the main limitations of the study is the retrospectiveness of the analysis. In fact, although the surveillance is active and carried out in real-time, the data analysis is carried out retrospectively together with the data deriving from the hospital discharge forms. It would be desirable to be able to analyze the data in parallel with their collection to create an active, flexible and responsive surveillance system. Another limitation is related to the small period of observation and variables included in the model. As discussed earlier, several additional clinical factors, such as diabetes [42,43], have been shown to be significantly correlated to SSI risk but were not included in this work. In addition, further mathematical tools may be implemented on the new dataset [46]. Finally, processes to identify causes and solutions of the most critical cases were not analyzed. Approaches such as Lean Six Sigma [47,48,49] or Fuzzy Logic [50] have been shown to be valid supports for reducing the risk of infection and will, therefore, be the subject of future studies.

5. Conclusions

The risk factors correlated to the surgical site infection that occurs in patients that underwent surgery were evaluated in this work. The court of patients of the “Federico II” University Hospital is composed of 4031 patients (48 with SSIs). A performed statistical analysis to correlate SSIs and factor risk was carried out, in fact, Firth’s penalized maximum likelihood logistic regression model allowed us to investigate the factors most influencing the risk of infection. The data relived have noted that there is a statistically significant difference between SSIs and the type of surgery department and between SSIs and antibiotic prophylaxis, if the antibiotic number is 2 or more. Finally, different artificial intelligence models to predict SSIs were used. In this analysis, it is easy to note how KNN better handle the imbalanced dataset (48 infected and 3983 healthy), observing the highest accuracy value. In further work, we will aim to expand the dataset and widen the number of predictors in order to build a more reliable and accurate model.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, M.T. and G.I.; methodology, A.S. and I.L.; validation, A.S. and I.L.; formal analysis, A.S. and I.L.; investigation, A.S., I.L. and G.I.; resources, M.T. and G.I.; data curation, A.S., I.L. and G.I.; writing—original draft preparation, A.S. and I.L.; writing—review and editing, M.T. and G.I.; visualization, A.S.; supervision, M.T. and G.I.; project administration, M.T. and G.I. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Informed Consent Statement

In compliance with the Declaration of Helsinki and with the Italian Legislative Decree 211/2003, Implementation of the 2001/20/CE directive, since no patients/children were involved in the study, the signed informed consent form and the ethical approval are not mandatory for these types of studies. Furthermore, in compliance with the regulations of the Italian National Institute of Health, our study is not reported among those needing assessment by the Ethical Committee of the Italian National Institute of Health.

Data Availability Statement

The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are not publicly available for privacy reasons but are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Al-Tawfiq, J.A.; Tambyah, P.A. Healthcare associated infections (HAI) perspectives. J. Infect. Public Health 2014, 7, 339–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Berríos-Torres, S.I.; Umscheid, C.A.; Bratzler, D.W.; Leas, B.; Stone, E.C.; Kelz, R.R.; Reinke, C.E.; Morgan, S.; Solomkin, J.S.; Mazuski, J.E.; et al. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Guideline for the Prevention of Surgical Site Infection, 2017. JAMA Surg. 2017, 152, 784. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. Healthcare-Associated Infections: Surgical Site Infections; Annual Epidemiological Report for 2017; ECDC: Stockholm, Sweden, 2019.
  4. Dipartimento Scienze della Salute Pubblica e Pediatriche, Università di Torino. Studio di Prevalenza Italiano Sulle Infezioni Correlate All’assistenza e Sull’uso di Antibiotici Negli Ospedali per Acuti—Protocollo ECDC; Università di Torino: Torino, Italy, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  5. Leaper, D.J. Surgical-site infection. Br. J. Surg. 2010, 97, 1601–1602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Urban, J.A. Cost Analysis of Surgical Site Infections. Surg. Infect. 2006, 7, s19–s22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Gastmeier, P.; Schwab, F.; Sohr, D.; Behnke, M.; Geffers, C. Reproducibility of the Surveillance Effect to Decrease Nosocomial Infection Rates. Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemiol. 2009, 30, 993–999. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Haley, R.W.; Culver, D.H.; White, J.W.; Morgan, W.M.; Emori, T.G.; Munn, V.P.; Hooton, T.M. The efficacy of infection surveillance and control programs in preventing nosocomial infections in us hospitals. Am. J. Epidemiol. 1985, 121, 182–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Mahmoud, N.N.; Turpin, R.S.; Yang, G.; Saunders, W.B. Impact of Surgical Site Infections on Length of Stay and Costs in Selected Colorectal Procedures. Surg. Infect. 2009, 10, 539–544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Poggio, J. Perioperative Strategies to Prevent Surgical-Site Infection. Clin. Colon Rectal Surg. 2013, 26, 168–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Kocbek, P.; Fijacko, N.; Soguero-Ruiz, C.; Mikalsen, K.Ø.; Maver, U.; Povalej Brzan, P.; Stozer, A.; Jenssen, R.; Skrøvseth, S.O.; Stiglic, G. Maximizing Interpretability and Cost-Effectiveness of Surgical Site Infection (SSI) Predictive Models Using Feature-Specific Regularized Logistic Regression on Preoperative Temporal Data. Comput. Math. Methods Med. 2019, 2019, 2059851. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Mujagic, E.; Marti, W.R.; Coslovsky, M.; Soysal, S.D.; Mechera, R.; von Strauss, M.; Zeindler, J.; Saxer, F.; Mueller, A.; Fux, C.A.; et al. Associations of Hospital Length of Stay with Surgical Site Infections. World J. Surg. 2018, 42, 3888–3896. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Bisgaard, S.; Does, R.J.M.M. Quality Quandaries*: Health CareQuality—Reducing the Lengthof Stay at a Hospital. Qual. Eng. 2008, 21, 117–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Trunfio, T.A.; Scala, A.; Giglio, C.; Rossi, G.; Borrelli, A.; Romano, M.; Improta, G. Multiple regression model to analyze the total LOS for patients undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy. BMC Med. Inform. Decis. Mak. 2022, 22, 141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Scala, A.; Trunfio, T.A.; De Coppi, L.; Rossi, G.; Borrelli, A.; Triassi, M.; Improta, G. Regression Models to Study the Total LOS Related to Valvuloplasty. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 3117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Colella, Y.; Scala, A.; De Lauri, C.; Bruno, F.; Cesarelli, G.; Ferrucci, G.; Borrelli, A. Studying variables affecting the length of stay in patients with lower limb fractures by means of Machine Learning. In Proceedings of the 2021 5th International Conference on Medical and Health Informatics, Kyoto, Japan, 14–16 May 2021; pp. 39–43. [Google Scholar]
  17. Improta, G.; Borrelli, A.; Triassi, M. Machine Learning and Lean Six Sigma to Assess How COVID-19 Has Changed the Patient Management of the Complex Operative Unit of Neurology and Stroke Unit: A Single Center Study. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 5215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Trunfio, T.A.; Borrelli, A.; Improta, G. Is It Possible to Predict the Length of Stay of Patients Undergoing Hip-Replacement Surgery? Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 6219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Maria Ponsiglione, A.; Profeta, M.; Giglio, C.; Lombardi, A.; Borrelli, A.; Scala, A. Modeling the variation in length of stay for appendectomy and cholecystectomy interventions in the emergency general surgery. In Proceedings of the 2021 International Symposium on Biomedical Engineering and Computational Biology, Nanchang, China, 13–15 August 2021; pp. 1–4. [Google Scholar]
  20. Lei, P.-R.; Liao, J.-W.; Ruan, Y.; Yang, X.-F.; Hu, K.-P.; Liu, J.-P.; Chen, T.-F. Risk factors analysis for surgical site infection following elective colorectal resection: A retrospective regression analysis. Chin. Med. J. 2020, 133, 571–576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Improta, G.; Triassi, M.; Guizzi, G.; Santillo, L.C.; Revetria, R.; Catania, A.; Cassettari, L. An Innovative Contribution to Health Technology Assessment. In Modern Advances in Intelligent Systems and Tools; Studies in Computational Intelligence; Ding, W., Jiang, H., Ali, M., Li, M., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2012; Volume 431, pp. 127–131. ISBN 978-3-642-30731-7. [Google Scholar]
  22. Improta, G.; Perrone, A.; Russo, M.A.; Triassi, M. Health technology assessment (HTA) of optoelectronic biosensors for oncology by analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and Likert scale. BMC Med. Res. Methodol. 2019, 19, 140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Improta, G.; Russo, M.A.; Triassi, M.; Converso, G.; Murino, T.; Santillo, L.C. Use of the AHP methodology in system dynamics: Modelling and simulation for health technology assessments to determine the correct prosthesis choice for hernia diseases. Math. Biosci. 2018, 299, 19–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Improta, G.; Converso, G.; Murino, T.; Gallo, M.; Perrone, A.; Romano, M. Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) in Dynamic Configuration as a Tool for Health Technology Assessment (HTA): The Case of Biosensing Optoelectronics in Oncology. Int. J. Inf. Technol. Decis. Mak. 2019, 18, 1533–1550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Improta, G.; Ponsiglione, A.M.; Parente, G.; Romano, M.; Cesarelli, G.; Rea, T.; Triassi, M. Evaluation of Medical Training Courses Satisfaction: Qualitative Analysis and Analytic Hierarchy Process. In Proceedings of the European Medical and Biological Engineering Conference, Portorož, Slovenia, 29 November–3 December 2020; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 518–526. [Google Scholar]
  26. Centro Nazionale per la Prevenzione e il Controllo Delle Malattie (CCM). Sistema Nazionale Sorveglianza Delle Infezioni Del Sito Chirurgico (SNICh)—Protocollo; CCM: Bologna, Italy, 2011.
  27. Sarnelli, B.; D’Agostino, F.; Signoriello, G.; Guida, A. Sorveglianza delle Infezioni del Sito Chirurgico in Campania; Direzione Generale per la Tutela della Salute ed il Coordinamento del SSR: Regione Campania, Italy, 2019; ISBN 978-88-31204-06-4. [Google Scholar]
  28. Regione Campania—Giunta Regionale Deliberazione N. 1715—Area Generale di Coordinamento N. 20—Assistenza Sanitaria—del Piano Regionale di Prevenzione e Controllo delle Infezioni Associate All’assistenza Sanitaria. Bollettino Ufficiale Della Regione Campania, 22 October 2007. [Google Scholar]
  29. UK Health Security Agency. Protocol for the Surveillance of Surgical Site Infection Surgical Site Infection Surveillance Service; UKHSA: London, UK, 2013.
  30. Guarino, F.; Improta, G.; Triassi, M.; Castiglione, S.; Cicatelli, A. Air quality biomonitoring through Olea europaea L.: The study case of “Land of pyres”. Chemosphere 2021, 282, 131052. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Guarino, F.; Improta, G.; Triassi, M.; Cicatelli, A.; Castiglione, S. Effects of Zinc Pollution and Compost Amendment on the Root Microbiome of a Metal Tolerant Poplar Clone. Front. Microbiol. 2020, 11, 1677. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Guarino, F.; Conte, B.; Improta, G.; Sciarrillo, R.; Castiglione, S.; Cicatelli, A.; Guarino, C. Genetic characterization, micropropagation, and potential use for arsenic phytoremediation of Dittrichia viscosa (L.) Greuter. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2018, 148, 675–683. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Guarino, F.; Cicatelli, A.; Brundu, G.; Improta, G.; Triassi, M.; Castiglione, S. The use of MSAP reveals epigenetic diversity of the invasive clonal populations of Arundo donax L. PLoS ONE 2019, 14, e0215096. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. De Agostini, A.; Caltagirone, C.; Caredda, A.; Cicatelli, A.; Cogoni, A.; Farci, D.; Guarino, F.; Garau, A.; Labra, M.; Lussu, M.; et al. Heavy metal tolerance of orchid populations growing on abandoned mine tailings: A case study in Sardinia Island (Italy). Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2020, 189, 110018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Moccia, E.; Intiso, A.; Cicatelli, A.; Proto, A.; Guarino, F.; Iannece, P.; Castiglione, S.; Rossi, F. Use of Zea mays L. in phytoremediation of trichloroethylene. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2017, 24, 11053–11060. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Chawla, N.V.; Bowyer, K.W.; Hall, L.O.; Kegelmeyer, W.P. SMOTE: Synthetic Minority Over-sampling Technique. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 2002, 16, 321–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Cunha, T.F.S.; Soares Melancia, T.A.; Zagalo Fernandes Ribeiro, C.M.; Almeida de Brito, J.A.; Abreu Miguel, S.S.; André Abreu Esteves Bogalhão do Casal, D. Risk factors for surgical site infection in cervico-facial oncological surgery. J. Cranio-Maxillofac. Surg. 2012, 40, 443–448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Cousin, A.-S.; Bouletreau, P.; Giai, J.; Ibrahim, B.; Louvrier, A.; Sigaux, N. Severity and long-term complications of surgical site infections after orthognathic surgery: A retrospective study. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 12015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Manoukian, S.; Stewart, S.; Dancer, S.; Graves, N.; Mason, H.; McFarland, A.; Robertson, C.; Reilly, J. Estimating excess length of stay due to healthcare-associated infections: A systematic review and meta-analysis of statistical methodology. J. Hosp. Infect. 2018, 100, 222–235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Lamagni, T.; Elgohari, S.; Harrington, P. Trends in surgical site infections following orthopaedic surgery. Curr. Opin. Infect. Dis. 2015, 28, 125–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Nasution, A.; Syed Sulaiman, S.A.; Shafie, A.A. PHP33 Drug-Related Problems and Length of Stay in the Management of Infection in Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease. Value Health 2012, 15, A615. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Hawn, M.T.; Richman, J.S.; Vick, C.C.; Deierhoi, R.J.; Graham, L.A.; Henderson, W.G.; Itani, K.M.F. Timing of Surgical Antibiotic Prophylaxis and the Risk of Surgical Site Infection. JAMA Surg. 2013, 148, 649. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Fisichella, L.; Fenga, D.; Rosa, M.A. Surgical Site Infection In Orthopaedic Surgery: Correlation Between Age, Diabetes, Smoke And Surgical Risk. Folia Med. 2014, 56, 259–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Latham, R.; Lancaster, A.D.; Covington, J.F.; Pirolo, J.S.; Thomas, C.S. The Association of Diabetes and Glucose Control with Surgical-Site Infections among Cardiothoracic Surgery Patients. Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemiol. 2001, 22, 607–612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Montella, E.; Ferraro, A.; Sperlì, G.; Triassi, M.; Santini, S.; Improta, G. Predictive Analysis of Healthcare-Associated Blood Stream Infections in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit Using Artificial Intelligence: A Single Center Study. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public. Health 2022, 19, 2498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Tunthanathip, T.; Sae-heng, S.; Oearsakul, T.; Sakarunchai, I.; Kaewborisutsakul, A.; Taweesomboonyat, C. Machine learning applications for the prediction of surgical site infection in neurological operations. Neurosurg. Focus 2019, 47, E7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Hopkins, B.S.; Mazmudar, A.; Driscoll, C.; Svet, M.; Goergen, J.; Kelsten, M.; Shlobin, N.A.; Kesavabhotla, K.; Smith, Z.A.; Dahdaleh, N.S. Using artificial intelligence (AI) to predict postoperative surgical site infection: A retrospective cohort of 4046 posterior spinal fusions. Clin. Neurol. Neurosurg. 2020, 192, 105718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Ferraro, A.; Centobelli, P.; Cerchione, R.; Cicco, M.V.D.; Montella, E.; Raiola, E.; Triassi, M.; Improta, G. Implementation of lean practices to reduce healthcare associated infections. Int. J. Healthc. Technol. Manag. 2020, 18, 51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Cesarelli, G.; Montella, E.; Scala, A.; Raiola, E.; Triassi, M.; Improta, G. DMAIC Approach for the Reduction of Healthcare-Associated Infections in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit of the University Hospital of Naples ‘Federico II’. In Proceedings of the 8th European Medical and Biological Engineering Conference, Portorož, Slovenia, 29 November–3 December 2020; Jarm, T., Cvetkoska, A., Mahnič-Kalamiza, S., Miklavcic, D., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2021; pp. 414–423. [Google Scholar]
  50. Colella, Y.; Valente, A.S.; Rossano, L.; Trunfio, T.A.; Fiorillo, A.; Improta, G. A Fuzzy Inference System for the Assessment of Indoor Air Quality in an Operating Room to Prevent Surgical Site Infection. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public. Health 2022, 19, 3533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Global Feature Importance.
Figure 1. Global Feature Importance.
Ijerph 19 10021 g001
Table 1. Study population characteristics.
Table 1. Study population characteristics.
SSIsNon-SSIsp-Value
Sex, boys29 (1.23%)2331 (98.77%)0.791
Sex, girls19 (1.14%)1652 (98.86%)
Hospital Regime
Ordinary hospitalization48 (1.33%)35,558 (98.67%)0.017
Day Surgery0 (0.00%)425 (100.00%)
Surgery Department
General surgery2 (0.25%)796 (99.75%)<0.000
Maxillo-facial surgery36 (3.17%)1098 (96.83%)
Pediatric surgery1 (0.12%)813 (99.88%)
Neurosurgery4 (0.42%)958 (99.58%)
Orthopedics5 (1.55%)318 (98.45%)
Antibiotic prophylaxis
no 6 (0.57%)1.038 (99.43%)
1 antibiotic19 (0.70%)2697 (99.30%)<0.000
2 or more antibiotics23 (8.49%)248 (91.51%)
Table 2. Associations between SSIs and the risk factors in surgery patients.
Table 2. Associations between SSIs and the risk factors in surgery patients.
OR95% CIp-Value
Sex, girls0.750−0.705–6.2280.349
Age1.010−0.006–0.0260.221
Hospital regime
Ordinary hospitalization3.908−0.705–6.2280.248
Surgery Department
Maxillo-facial surgery7.3210.867–3.595<0.001
Pediatric surgery0.660−3.002–1.8830.722
Neurosurgery1.422−1.177–2.1190.656
Orthopedics4.7810.015–3.3700.047
Length of preoperative hospital stay1.021−0.002–0.0460.071
Antibiotic prophylaxis, No
1 antibiotics0.447−1.797–0.3180.151
2 or more antibiotics4.2940.438–2.6270.004
Table 3. ML Algorithms.
Table 3. ML Algorithms.
Performance MetricsClassRFLRDTKNNGBTXGBNB
Accuracy (%)Overall92.578.593.994.99069.572.4
Error (%)Overall7.521.56.15.11030.527.6
Precision (%)099.499.299.59999.299.799.4
17.92.811.14.75.13.22.8
Sensitivity (%)09378.858.395.990.669.472.5
1505094.416.741.783.366.7
Specificity (%)0505058.316.741.783.366.7
19378.894.495.990.669.472.5
F-measure (%)096.187.996.997.494.781.883.9
113.65.218.77.396.15.4
Table 4. Confusion Matrix (DT).
Table 4. Confusion Matrix (DT).
Real/Predicted01
094056
157
Table 5. Confusion Matrix (RF).
Table 5. Confusion Matrix (RF).
Real/Predicted01
092670
166
Table 6. Confusion Matrix (KNN).
Table 6. Confusion Matrix (KNN).
Real/Predicted01
095541
1102
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Scala, A.; Loperto, I.; Triassi, M.; Improta, G. Risk Factors Analysis of Surgical Infection Using Artificial Intelligence: A Single Center Study. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 10021. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191610021

AMA Style

Scala A, Loperto I, Triassi M, Improta G. Risk Factors Analysis of Surgical Infection Using Artificial Intelligence: A Single Center Study. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2022; 19(16):10021. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191610021

Chicago/Turabian Style

Scala, Arianna, Ilaria Loperto, Maria Triassi, and Giovanni Improta. 2022. "Risk Factors Analysis of Surgical Infection Using Artificial Intelligence: A Single Center Study" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 19, no. 16: 10021. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191610021

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop