Search

Background: Surgical glove perforation may expose both patients and staff members to severe complications. This study aimed to determine surgical glove perforation rate and the factors associated with glove defect., Material and Methods: This descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted between January and March 2017 at a Tunisian university hospital center in 3 different surgical departments: urology, maxillofacial, and general and digestive. The gloves were collected and tested to detect perforations using the water-leak test as described in European Norm NF EN 455-1. For percentage comparisons, the χ 2 test was used with a significance threshold of 5%., Results: A total of 284 gloves were collected. Of these, 47 were found to be perforated, a rate of 16.5%. All perforations were unnoticed by the surgical team members. The majority of perforated gloves (61.7%) were collected after urology procedures (P = .00005), 77% of perforated gloves were detected when the duration of the procedure exceeded 90 minutes (P = .001), and 96% were from brand A, which were the thicker gloves (P = .015)., Conclusions: This study highlighted an important problem neglected by surgical teams. The findings reaffirm the importance of double-gloving and changing gloves in surgeries of more than 90 minutes' duration., (Copyright © 2018 Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The purpose of this study was to compare the frequency of glove defects for nonlatex surgical gloves while surgeons performed routine surgery and to evaluate surgeons' satisfaction with nonlatex sterile gloves., Methods: Two brands of latex gloves and 6 brands of nonlatex gloves were tested. Gloves were collected at the end of each surgical procedure and tested for visual defects and barrier integrity using an automated calibrated water test machine consistent with FDA's recommended standards. A total of 6386 gloves used by 101 surgeons and 164 residents representing 15 surgical services were included in the analysis., Results: Higher after-use defect rates occurred in nonlatex surgical gloves than in latex gloves. Higher times of use were related to higher defect rates for some surgical specialties, and both surgeons and residents were less satisfied with nonlatex surgical gloves., Conclusion: Intact latex and nonlatex surgical gloves provide adequate barrier protection. Nonlatex surgical gloves have higher failure rates and lower user satisfaction than latex gloves do. Both nonlatex and latex gloves should be changed after 2 to 3 hours of use because the barrier of either type of glove becomes compromised with extended use.

Two thousand four hundred medical gloves were evaluated for leakage. Types of gloves examined (number of brands) included sterile latex (seven) sterile vinyl (four), nonsterile latex (six), and nonsterile vinyl (seven). Sampling was done from one box of each brand. Fifty gloves from each box were filled with 300 ml of water (the standard test used by the American Society for Testing and Materials). An additional 25 cm pressure was applied to water-filled gloves. Another 50 gloves of each box were donned and dipped into a basin that contained heparinized human blood. Only four brands of sterile latex surgeon's gloves proved nonpermeable to water and blood. Other brands showed leakage that ranged from 1% to 52%. Analysis of proportions of pairs of gloves permeable to water or blood indicated a strong statistical association of nonsterile packaging or packaging in suction kits with increased leakage rates. These findings affirm that gloves can be regarded only as a means of reducing the risk of gross soilage from blood or body fluids. Quality control standards to ensure more uniform glove quality are needed.