{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.022151898734177215, 'fraction_numerical': 0.015822784810126583, 'mean_word_length': 5.875, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Surgeon Practice Patterns for Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Gynecologic Surgery

Objective To assess surgeon practice patterns for antibiotic prophylaxis in gynecologic surgery. Methods A survey was distributed at the 2011 annual scientific meeting of the Society of Gynecologic Surgeons regarding antibiotic prophylaxis practices. Results The response rate was 51%. Most surgeons did not use antibiotic prophylaxis for dilation and curettage without products of conception, hysteroscopy, and loop electrocautery excision procedure/cone biopsy. For laparoscopy without graft placement, 45.9% did not use prophylaxis. Prophylaxis was common for hysterectomy. For midurethral slings, 8.2% did not use prophylaxis. When graft material was used in prolapse surgery, at least 93% of surgeons administered some form of antibiotic prophylaxis. Only 70% of respondents prescribe antibiotic prophylaxis for hysterectomy consistent with recommendations from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, whereas 78% are consistent with specifications from the Joint Commission. Conclusions Wide variability exists in antibiotic prophylaxis in gynecologic surgery. Surgeon preference or local hospital policies affect choice of prophylaxis less than 14.9% of the time.