<p><strong>OBJECTIVE: </strong>To describe the epidemiology of surgical site infections (SSIs) after pediatric ambulatory surgery.</p>

<p><strong>DESIGN: </strong>Observational cohort study with 60 days follow-up after surgery.</p>

<p><strong>SETTING: </strong>The study took place in 3 ambulatory surgical facilities (ASFs) and 1 hospital-based facility in a single pediatric healthcare network.ParticipantsChildren &lt;18 years undergoing ambulatory surgery were included in the study. Of 19,777 eligible surgical encounters, 8,502 patients were enrolled.</p>

<p><strong>METHODS: </strong>Data were collected through parental interviews and from chart reviews. We assessed 2 outcomes: (1) National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN)-defined SSI and (2) evidence of possible infection using a definition developed for this study.</p>

<p><strong>RESULTS: </strong>We identified 21 NSHN SSIs for a rate of 2.5 SSIs per 1,000 surgical encounters: 2.9 per 1,000 at the hospital-based facility and 1.6 per 1,000 at the ASFs. After restricting the search to procedures completed at both facilities and adjustment for patient demographics, there was no difference in the risk of NHSN SSI between the 2 types of facilities (odds ratio, 0.7; 95% confidence interval, 0.2-2.3). Within 60 days after surgery, 404 surgical patients had some or strong evidence of possible infection obtained from parental interview and/or chart review (rate, 48 SSIs per 1,000 surgical encounters). Of 306 cases identified through parental interviews, 176 cases (57%) did not have chart documentation. In our multivariable analysis, older age and black race were associated with a reduced risk of possible infection.</p>

<p><strong>CONCLUSIONS: </strong>The rate of NHSN-defined SSI after pediatric ambulatory surgery was low, although a substantial additional burden of infectious morbidity related to surgery might not have been captured by standard surveillance strategies and definitions.</p>

<p><strong>BACKGROUND: </strong> Surveillance for surgical site infections (SSIs) after ambulatory surgery in children requires a detailed manual chart review to assess criteria defined by the National Health and Safety Network (NHSN). Electronic health records (EHRs) impose an inefficient search process where infection preventionists must manually review every postsurgical encounter (&lt; 30 days). Using text mining and business intelligence software, we developed an information foraging application, the SSI Workbench, to visually present which postsurgical encounters included SSI-related terms and synonyms, antibiotic, and culture orders.</p>

<p><strong>OBJECTIVE: </strong> This article compares the Workbench and EHR on four dimensions: (1) effectiveness, (2) efficiency, (3) workload, and (4) usability.</p>

<p><strong>METHODS: </strong> Comparative usability test of Workbench and EHR. Objective test metrics are time per case, encounters reviewed per case, time per encounter, and retrieval of information meeting NHSN definitions. Subjective measures are cognitive load using the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Task Load Index (NASA TLX), and a questionnaire on system usability and utility.</p>

<p><strong>RESULTS: </strong> Eight infection preventionists participated in the test. There was no difference in effectiveness as subjects retrieved information from all cases, using both systems, to meet the NHSN criteria. There was no difference in efficiency in time per case between the Workbench and EHR (8.58 vs. 7.39 minutes,  = 0.36). However, with the Workbench subjects opened fewer encounters per case (3.0 vs. 7.5,  = 0.002), spent more time per encounter (2.23 vs. 0.92 minutes,  = 0.002), rated the Workbench lower in cognitive load (NASA TLX, 24 vs. 33,  = 0.02), and significantly higher in measures of usability.</p>

<p><strong>CONCLUSION: </strong> Compared with the EHR, the Workbench was more usable, short, and reduced cognitive load. In overall efficiency, the Workbench did not save time, but demonstrated a shift from between-encounter foraging to within-encounter foraging and was rated as significantly more efficient. Our results suggest that infection surveillance can be better supported by systems applying information foraging theory.</p>