This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Letters to the Editor: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when Letters to the Editor are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by TURNER, R. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by TURNER, R. S.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, 1974;56:430-435.
© 1974 by The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc

Laminar Air Flow

ITS ORIGINAL SURGICAL APPLICATION AND LONG-TERM RESULTS

ROBERT S. TURNER M.D.1

1 From the Bataan Memorial Hospital and Lovelace Clinic, Albuquerque

Bacterial counts on air samples and colony counts on settling plates revealed markedly fewer viable bacteria in a vertical laminar-air-flow operating room than in control operating rooms. In a fifty-four-month study, the postoperative infection rate was 0.79 per cent after 3,407 operations in the vertical laminar-air-flow operating room, and 1.04 per cent after 8,253 operations in the two control operating rooms. For the observed difference in infection rate to be statistically significant at the p sim 0.05 level, there would have to be 9,917 operations using the laminar-air-flow system and 24,016 operations done in control rooms.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?