Infection rates are important markers for clinical quality assurance.
For internal control,they may only be used under the condition of homo
geneous data collection and evaluation according to identical standard
operating procedures during the entire investigation period. For inte
r-hospital comparison,they may only be used if additionally the observ
ed patient groups are well defined and comparable. A survey of the inf
ection rates published during the last 6 years in the German traumatol
ogical literature (n=71) indeed shows (concerning series later than 19
85) similar infection rates for procedures in less and in more problem
atic anatomical regions and in clean and contaminated situations of ab
out 2 - 3%, after open injuries sporadically max. 10%. Finally, it is
demonstrated that conclusions concerning a general ''risk of infection
'' based on infection rates for specific surgical procedures are not p
ossible and vice versa. We strongly recommend the future application o
f a standardized definition of wound infection. The differentiation be
tween deep and superficial infection should be abandoned. For all ment
ioned ''infection rates'' it should be indicated whether it is with re
ference to the risk of infection of a specific procedure or only a gen
eral statement.