Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-2dmjx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-10T09:12:15.309Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Bair Hugger: A potential enemy within the operating room

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 April 2022

William G. Watkins ,
Richard A. Jaffe  and
John G. Brock-Utne
William G. Watkins
Affiliation:
Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative & Pain Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California
Richard A. Jaffe
Affiliation:
Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative & Pain Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California
John G. Brock-Utne*
Affiliation:
Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative & Pain Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California
*
Author for correspondence: John G. Brock-Utne, E-mail: brockutn@stanford.edu
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content. As you have access to this content, full HTML content is provided on this page. A PDF of this content is also available in through the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Information

Type
Letter to the Editor
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 44 , Issue 1 , January 2023 , pp. 164 - 166
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America

To the Editor—The American Society of Anesthesiologists practice guidelines recommend normothermia as a goal during anesthetic emergence and recovery 1 in part to reduce adverse cardiac events. Reference Frank, Fleisher and Breslow2 The Bair Hugger (3M, St Paul, MN) is a type of forced-air warming (FAW) device commonly used to maintain intraoperative normothermia; however, its use is not without the potential for harm. Reference Onyekwelu, Yakkanti, Protzer, Pinkston, Tucker and Seligson3 Surgical site infection (SSI) is a major risk of any surgical procedure. Rates of SSI have been reported to be as high as 6.8% in some types of orthopedic surgery. Reference Baker, King and Smith4 Contamination of operating room (OR) air with human pathogens has been directly attributed to FAW Reference Brock-Utne, Taylor Ward and Jaffe5 ; however, contamination of OR air is not sufficient for demonstrating SSI causation. Reference Wood, Moss, Keenan, Reed and Leaper6

Contamination of the OR air with human pathogens may be an intraoperative safety hazard, and adherence to recommended FAW-device filter-replacement guidelines may improve patient safety. Bair Hugger devices draw in ambient air through a HEPA filter before heating and traveling through a distal hose to a disposable patient blanket. 7 The manufacturer recommends that the HEPA filter should be changed “every 12 months or 500 hours of use,” whichever comes first. 7 Our institution changes these filters on an annual basis presuming that the usage of each device is below the 500 hours per year limit. We examined mean annual usage among 36 Bair Hugger devices at our institution and compared the results to manufacturer recommendations.

Methods

Bair Hugger usage was determined by utilizing the Bair Hugger alternative modes feature (activated by a button concealed within the logo), which displays accumulated run time. The serial number of each Bair Hugger unit along with its total run time was logged. Each device’s purchase date and last filter change date was obtained from our institution’s technology registry system. The average annual run time in hours was calculated by dividing the total number of run hours for each Bair Hugger unit by time elapsed since its purchase date in years. A mean annual run time in hours was calculated for all devices. A 1-sample t test was used to compare the sample mean to the recommended maximum run time of 500 hours.

In addition, we surveyed 60 regional hospitals and surgical centers in California regarding their Bair Hugger filter-change practice.

Results

The mean annual run time for our 36 Bair Hugger units was 785.09 hours (SD, 239.72 hours) (Fig. 1). Furthermore, 32 units (89%) had >500 hours average annual run time. The sample mean (785.09 hours) was significantly different from the recommended maximum of 500 hours (P < .0001).

Fig. 1.

Average annual run hours per Bair Hugger. Scatter plot with each data point representing 1 Bair Hugger device (x-axis) and its annual run time (y-axis). The overlaid red square with error bars represents mean annual run hours (785 ± 240) among all 36 Bair Hugger devices studied.

The results of this survey revealed that none of the 60 hospitals or surgical centers in California followed manufacturer recommendations for filter change.

Discussion

The Bair Hugger device may increase the risk for an SSI in several ways. First, a Bair Hugger unit draws air in from a potentially contaminated floor, warms it, then blows it into the disposable warming blanket. This warmed air is released through small pores on the underside of the blanket, often in the vicinity of the surgical field. Contamination of the Bair Hugger, the outlet hose, and/or the warmed air passing through them could occur as the efficiency of the inlet HEPA filter decreases over time.

Our study revealed that only 4 of the 36 Bair Hugger devices examined were compliant with the manufacturer’s filter-change recommendations. The fact that Bair Hugger devices have been shown to potentially spread human pathogens across open surgical wounds Reference Brock-Utne, Taylor Ward and Jaffe5 should alert healthcare institutions to strictly follow the recommended filter replacement after 500 hours of run time rather than simply changing the filter on an annual basis. To see how our institution compared to others regarding compliance with manufacture’s recommendations, we informally surveyed 60 regional hospitals and surgical centers in California that used Bair Hugger units. The survey revealed that none of the institutions followed the manufacturer’s 500-hour maximum use-time recommendation. Instead, most of them changed filters on an annual basis without regard to actual usage hours.

Regarding potential modifications to Bair Hugger devices, simply incorporating an alarm to indicate when 500 hours of run time had elapsed may lead to improved patient safety. Recognizing that 500 hours of use in an environment with a high particulate load may not be equivalent to 500 hours in a “cleaner” environment; the best alarm system would indicate when filter efficacy had dropped below an acceptable minimum. Even more simply, placing a disposable HEPA filter at the end of the Bair Hugger hose where it attaches to the blanket may prove most advantageous. Reference Brock-Utne, Taylor Ward and Jaffe5

Although it remains unproven that the Bair Hugger or other FAW devices may cause surgical site or implant-associated infections, Reference Wood, Moss, Keenan, Reed and Leaper6 we recommend that alternative patient-warming methods Reference Santa Maria, Santa Maria and Eisenried8 be used, especially in immunosuppressed patients and in procedures involving surgical implants. We believe that FAW devices may represent an unnecessary risk in these cases. Unfortunately, no randomized controlled clinical trials have been conducted to directly answer this question. Future studies should investigate a possible link between higher Bair Hugger run hours and increased SSI.

In conclusion, we recommend that institutions track Bair Hugge run time and change filters at least every 500 hours or at 1 year, whichever comes first. 3M should also consider implementing a 500-hour filter use alarm or installing a disposable HEPA filter at the end of the hose as it enters the warming blanket.

Acknowledgments

Financial support

No financial support was provided relevant to this article.

Conflicts of interest

All authors report no conflicts of interest relevant to this article.

References

Practice guidelines for postanesthetic care. American Society of Anesthesiologists website. http://www.asahq.org. Accessed March 10, 2021.Google Scholar
Frank, SM, Fleisher, LA, Breslow, MJ, et al. Perioperative maintenance of normothermia reduces the incidence of morbid cardiac events. A randomized clinical trial. JAMA 1997;277:1127–1134.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Onyekwelu, I, Yakkanti, R, Protzer, L, Pinkston, CM, Tucker, C, Seligson, D. Surgical wound classification and surgical site infections in the orthopaedic patient. J Am Acad Ortho Surg Glob Res Rev 2017:e022.Google Scholar
Baker, N, King, D, Smith, EG. Infection control hazards of intraoperative forced air warming. J Hosp Infect 2002;51:153–154.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brock-Utne, JG, Taylor Ward, J, Jaffe, RA. Unexpected sources of airborne microbial contamination in the operating room. J Hosp Infect 2021;113:59–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, AM, Moss, C, Keenan, A, Reed, MR, Leaper, DJ, Infection control hazards associated with the use of forced-air warming in operating theatres. J Hosp Infect 2014;88:132–140.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bair Hugger model 505 and model 500 OR warming units operators manual. 3M website. https://www.3m.com/3M/en_US/p/d/v000265003/. Accessed February 26, 2021.Google Scholar
Santa Maria, P, Santa Maria, C, Eisenried, A, et al. A novel thermal compression device for perioperative warming. A randomized trial for feasibility and efficacy. Boston Med Center Anesthesiol 2017;17:102–108.Google Scholar
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Average annual run hours per Bair Hugger. Scatter plot with each data point representing 1 Bair Hugger device (x-axis) and its annual run time (y-axis). The overlaid red square with error bars represents mean annual run hours (785 ± 240) among all 36 Bair Hugger devices studied.