Bioaersols in orthopedic surgical procedures and implications for clinical practice in the times of COVID-19 pandemic: a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis

1. Background

The SARS-CoV-2 virus has caused an unprecedented, catastrophic pandemic, which has adversely affected healthcare systems globally (1). As a result, the number of surgical procedures in hospitals has decreased substantially, owing in part to the potential risk of viral transmission through aerosols (2,3). Orthopaedic surgical procedures (OSP) are considered as aerosol generating procedures (AGP), chiefly due to the use of high-speed drilling and cutting tools, electrocautery and wound lavage systems (4,5). However, there is a dearth of supporting scientific data about the quantity, quality and infectivity of the aerosols generated during OSP (4).

2. Need for review

The proposed systematic review and meta-analysis will be conducted to assimilate and summarize the existing literature on aerosol generation in orthopedic procedures. In the context of the current COVID-19 pandemic, we also wish to analyse the available evidence to determine what preventive strategies could be undertaken to decrease the risk of transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 virus through bioaerosols generated during orthopedic surgical procedures.

3. Objectives

This study has two key objectives:

1. To determine the characteristics (amount and/or density, size, infectivity, and spread etc.) of bioaerosols found in orthopaedic operating rooms (ORs).

2. To determine the characteristics of aerosols generated by different orthopaedics power tools and devices.

4. PICO framework for the study

1. Participants: patients/animals undergoing orthopedic surgical procedures (depending on study design)

2. Intervention: orthopaedics surgical procedures

3. Control: none

4. Outcomes: various aspects of aerosol generation, as outlined in section 5(f)

5. Methods

This systematic review and meta-analysis will be conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines.

1. Review Protocol

   A protocol of the systematic review will be formulated a priori and made available online. The review protocol will be formulated in accordance with the PRISMA-P guidelines. (Appendix I)

2. Eligibility Criteria

   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 OSP or aerosol generation by orthopaedic power tools will included. Both English and non-English articles will be included. Studies looking at AGPs in specialties other than orthopaedic surgery, conference papers, review articles, expert or personal opinions and editorials will be excluded. Studies using which do not evaluate aerosol generation in orthopaedic surgical procedures, including ‘sham-surgery’ designs will also be excluded.

3. Information Sources & Literature search

   The primary search will be conducted on the PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus and Cochrane Library databases, using a well-defined search strategy. The medRxiv (https://www.medrxiv.org/), bioRxiv (https://www.biorxiv.org/) and Lancet preprint (https://www.thelancet.com/preprints) servers will also be searched to identify unpublished studies (Table 1). For the secondary search, a manual search of references from the full-text of all included articles & relevant review articles will be conducted. There will be no restrictions on the language or date of publication. Furthermore, the electronic databases of select peer-reviewed orthopaedics journals (JBJS American, Bone and Joint Journal, Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma, Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, Injury and Acta Orthopaedica) will also be searched to identify relevant literature.

   View this table:

   • View inline
   • View popup
   • Download powerpoint

   Table 1:

   Literature search strategy for the review

4. Study Selection

   Two authors (SS and RJ) will independently screen titles and abstracts of all articles identified in the initial search. The full-texts of all articles shortlisted after initial screening will be obtained, assessed against the prespecified inclusion and exclusion criteria, and accepted or rejected, as appropriate. In the event of disagreement, a consensus will be reached by discussion with the intervention of the senior author (MSD). If needed, the author(s) of eligible studies will be contacted for clarification to determine inclusion or exclusion in the review. Reasons for exclusion of those studies for which full-text was obtained will be documented.

5. Data Collection & Data Items

   Two authors (SS and RJ) will extract data from each included study independently using pre-piloted data extraction forms; this will be cross-checked by a third author (DN) for accuracy. Baseline data items which will be extracted will include:

   • First author name, year and journal of publication

   • Language of publication

   • Study design: human/cadaveric/animal/experimental; whether comparative or non-comparative; whether prospective or retrospective (for human studies).

   • Number of patients/experiments

   • Orthopedic surgical procedure investigated

   • Orthopedic power tools/ instruments investigated

6. Outcome Measures

   Owing to the broad nature of the research question, we acknowledge that it is difficult to precisely define all the possible outcome measures. However, the following important outcome measures will be included, others may be added as the review evidence is gathered :

   • Total and/or viable particle counts

   • Aerosol particle size

   • Aerosol particulate concentration

   • Microbiological air contamination

   • Aerosol scatter characteristics

   • Contamination of OR personnel by aerosols

   • Presence of blood in aerosols

7. Data Analysis and Synthesis

   Both qualitative and quantitative analyses will be performed. For qualitative analysis, appropriate tables and data visualization diagrams will be constructed. Baseline data items as well as all the pre-specified outcome measures will be reported. Wherever appropriate, meta-analysis using a random-effects model will be used to calculate pooled effect-size estimates of outcome variables (for e.g. total particle count, particle density etc.); results will be reported as means with 95% confidence intervals. Forest plots will be constructed to visualize the results. Statistical heterogeneity will be evaluated by the I² test. If high statistical heterogeneity is identified (I² > 75%), leave-one-out sensitivity analysis will be performed to identify the effect of each included study on the overall effect estimate. No subgroup analysis has been planned a-priori; however, it may be undertaken depending on the available evidence. Analysis will be performed by the Open Meta Analyst Software.

8. Assessment of Risk of Bias

   The quality of the studies included will be evaluated by the Risk of Bias in Studies estimating Prevalence of Exposure to Occupational risk factors (RoB-SPEO) tool (6). The studies will be individually rated as ‘low, probably low, probably high, high or no information’ based on bias assessment in eight separate domains. Although this tool is relatively new and has limited peer validation, it is well-suited for the purposes of this systematic review, and has been shown to have good inter-observer agreement.

9. Assessment of Strength of Evidence

   The overall strength of evidence will be assessed by the GRADE approach.