Abstract
Background Orthopedic surgical procedures involve a number of aerosol generating procedures; these include electrocautery, power instruments for bone cutting, burring and drilling, and tools for wound lavage. This assumes a great significance in the context of the current COVD-19 pandemic, as there are chances of aerosol-borne disease transmission in orthopedic surgical procedures. Hence, this systematic review and meta-analysis will be undertaken to assimilate and analyse the available evidence on bioaerosols in orthopedic surgical procedures and their significance with respect to SARS-CoV-2 virus transmission. Objectives To determine the characteristics (amount and/or density, size, infectivity, and spread etc.) of bioaerosols found in orthopaedic operating rooms (ORs) and to determine the characteristics of aerosols generated by different orthopaedic power tools and devices. Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis will be conducted. The PRISMA guidelines will be strictly followed. The primary search will be conducted on the PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane Library, medRxiv, bioRxix and Lancet preprint databases, using a well-defined search strategy. Any original research study (including cohort, case-control, case series, cadaveric studies and studies, animal models, laboratory based experimental studies) looking at aerosol generation in orthopedic surgical procedures, or aerosol generation by orthopaedic power tools and devices will included. Outcome measures will include characteristics (amount and/or density, size, infectivity, and spread etc.) of bioaerosols found in orthopaedic operating rooms (ORs) and those generated by various orthopaedics power tools and devices. Metanalysis using the random-effects model will be conducted to determined pooled estimates of the outcome variables. Heterogeneity will be assessed by the I2 test. Risk of bias will be assessed by the Risk of Bias in Studies estimating Prevalence of Exposure to Occupational risk factors (RoB-SPEO) tool. The overall strength of evidence will be assessed by the GRADE approach.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Clinical Trial
Not applicable
Funding Statement
No sources of funding
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
PRISMA-P guidelines were followed in formulating this protocol.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Since this is a protocol for systematic review, it does not contain data. However, the search strategy has been presented in Table 1.
