Surveillance of surgical-site infection (SSI) is becoming more important given the current situation of increasing antibiotic resistance by microorganisms. It may be difficult to carry out SSI surveillance at small-scale community hospitals because of small staff numbers. We examined whether SSI surveillance could be carried out with a system we devised. Furthermore, we investigated the SSI rateat our small-scale community hospital (179 beds) in aJapanese city (populations, 330 000). Between June andDecember 2003, operations were performed on 210patients. Procedures were identified as clean (n = 85),clean-contaminated (n = 108), contaminated (n = 14), or dirty-infected (n = 3). A 7-month prospective survey ofSSI was conducted. SSIs were classified according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention criteria and identified using bedside surveillance and post-discharge follow-up. SSI developed following 16 procedures (7.6%). All patients who developed SSI had received antibiotic prophylaxis. Among the 16 patients with SSI, operations were clean (n = 1), clean-contaminated (n = 8), contaminated(n = 5), or dirty-infected (n = 2). Enterobacteriaceae were the most frequently isolated microorganisms, followed by Pseudomonas aeruginosa. SSI surveillance is just as important at small community hospitals as it is at larger hospitals, and SSI surveillance is relatively simple to institute at small-scale community hospitals with the selective use of investigation items.