Infection after knee arthroplasty is one of the most feared complications and routine measures areapplied to prevent it. The objective of this study is to identify which are the measures applied by the surgeons ofthe Valencian Community (CV) and know if the scientific evidence supports them or not. Methods. A descriptivecross-sectional observational study based on a survey of 64 surgeons and bibliographic searches on the aspectsincluded in the survey were conducted. Results. 18.8% of the surgeons perform screening for SARM carriersand decolonization. 98.4% use cefazoline and 1.6% cefuroxime as antibiotic prophylaxis. With respect to theduration of antibiotic prophylaxis, 51% of surgeons administer three doses (24 hours prophylaxis), 23.4% use 2doses and 17.2% of them use only one dose. 67.2% use 2% alcoholic chlorhexidine gluconate solution for surgicalsite preparation and 71.9% use adhesive incision drapes. Routine cement with antibiotics is used by 65.6% of respondents.The current scientific evidence supports antibiotic prophylaxis as performed by 100% of respondents;however there is no evidence for the superiority of the preparation of the skin with alcoholic chlorhexidine versusother antiseptics. There is also no evidence to support the use of adhesive incision drapes or the use of cementwith antibiotics in a routine manner. Conclusions. It would be advisable for the CV surgeons to avoid the use ofincision adhesive drapes and the application of cement with antibiotics in all cases. The preparation of the skinwith alcoholic chlorhexidine does not seem to be more effective than other antiseptics in orthopaedic surgery. Thescreening of SAMR carriers and their decolonization seems to reduce the infection rate; its use can be recommendedtoday, but studies with the largest number of patients that confirm their benefit are needed.

Infection after knee arthroplasty is one of the most feared complications and routine measures areapplied to prevent it. The objective of this study is to identify which are the measures applied by the surgeons ofthe Valencian Community (CV) and know if the scientific evidence supports them or not. Methods. A descriptivecross-sectional observational study based on a survey of 64 surgeons and bibliographic searches on the aspectsincluded in the survey were conducted. Results. 18.8% of the surgeons perform screening for SARM carriersand decolonization. 98.4% use cefazoline and 1.6% cefuroxime as antibiotic prophylaxis. With respect to theduration of antibiotic prophylaxis, 51% of surgeons administer three doses (24 hours prophylaxis), 23.4% use 2doses and 17.2% of them use only one dose. 67.2% use 2% alcoholic chlorhexidine gluconate solution for surgicalsite preparation and 71.9% use adhesive incision drapes. Routine cement with antibiotics is used by 65.6% of respondents.The current scientific evidence supports antibiotic prophylaxis as performed by 100% of respondents;however there is no evidence for the superiority of the preparation of the skin with alcoholic chlorhexidine versusother antiseptics. There is also no evidence to support the use of adhesive incision drapes or the use of cementwith antibiotics in a routine manner. Conclusions. It would be advisable for the CV surgeons to avoid the use ofincision adhesive drapes and the application of cement with antibiotics in all cases. The preparation of the skinwith alcoholic chlorhexidine does not seem to be more effective than other antiseptics in orthopaedic surgery. Thescreening of SAMR carriers and their decolonization seems to reduce the infection rate; its use can be recommendedtoday, but studies with the largest number of patients that confirm their benefit are needed.