I think it’s important not to throw the baby out with the bathwater. The air in functioning laminar flow is pristine.
We are presenting results at British trauma society in Stoke on Trent next month. It was a study using hes data looking at all trauma operations and subsequent coded
infections. We looked at hemiarthroasty as a seperate group to cross check and looked at the effect on infection rate in hospitals that changed trauma operations from plenium to
laminar flow theatres.
No reduction in infection by changing and the lowest infection rate in those hospitals that were conventional plenium and stayed that way - I'm guessing because they knew they had a low
infection rate so didn't bother to change rather than any ill effect of laminar flow.
I’m with Mark. I have looked hard and never found any true evidence that laminar flow makes a difference. Spent a few happy infection-free years in a vascular theatre
with no space constraints and without the appalling white noise. I suspect it’s a scam……
We had exactly the same height constraints in Rotherham (ceiling 2400mm, base at 1970mm). We put 2 in 4 years ago. Canopy works well, even with 2 consultants that
are over 6 foot 3 \90they complain a little but there have been no problems/issues). Remember that the lights can be raised above their base so they will always be higher
than 1970 mm.
Director for Surgery
Consultant Orthopaedic Surgeon
Mark, can you send me details. We are still doing all our joints in non laminar flow and only have one laminar flow theatre in which we do trauma!! I also agree about
retro fits, and the cost can be near to the cost of a new build theatre....
Have done some research on this which has been submitted. Long and short if it, hospitals doing trauma surgery in non laminar flow theatres have a lower
infection rate than those that do. Switching to laminar flow does not reduce infection rate.