Aim: We aimed to determine the rates of compliance with current guidelines for practices of perioperative antimicrobial prophylaxis (PAP) and the factors affecting these rates.Materials and Methods: Four hundred and ten surgeons from seven different branches attended the survey conducted between May 30 and June 30, 2013, in fifteen different centers. A 40-question questionnaire consisting of multiple choice and open-ended questions was prepared and applied by interviewing the surgeons. Results: The mean age was 38.01 ± 9.1 years; and 83.4% of the participants were male. Of the surveyed surgeons 46.2% stated that they had no information about the existence of any guidelines for surgical prophylaxis in their institutions and 34% stated that institutional guidelines were available and their prophylaxis practices were in accordance with them. Surgeons who were trained on surgical prophylaxis within the last three years were found to have a statistically higher (p<0.001) rate of compliance with the guidelines. Compared to surgeons from other branches, compliance rates in cardiovascular surgeons were statistically significantly higher (p=0.012). The duration of prophylaxis applied was longer than 24 hours in 56% of the participants. In procedures involving drains, 63.7% of the surgeons stated that they preferred to terminate surgical prophylaxis after removing the drainage tube. It was found that urologists used second and third generation cephalosporins statistically significantly more frequently (p<0.001; p=0.002). Of the surgeons 87.6% stated that they did not rotationally change the antibiotics they used for surgical prophylaxis. It was found that 33% of the centers did not have 24-hour infection consultation and microbiology laboratory facilities. The question "What are the most important reasons for failure in compliance with surgical prophylaxis guidelines?" was left unanswered by 50% of the participants. The most important reasons of incompliance were found to be "lack of regular feedback about hospital infections and the pathogenic microorganisms" (30%), "failure in application of the prophylactic agent in accordance with the timing and dosing determined by the healthcare personnel" (27%), and physicians' view that institutional PAP guidelines were insufficient (17%).Discussion and Conclusion: Besides the existence of institutional guidelines for the establishment of evidence-based PAP practices, it is also crucial to provide active participation of surgical healthcare units in the preparation of these guidelines and to maintain regular training and feedback meetings and active communication between medical branches.