Literature DB >> 15238110

Prospective study of glove perforation in obstetrical and gynecological operations: are we safe enough?

Monika Malhotra1, Jai Bhagwan Sharma, Leena Wadhwa, Raksha Arora.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To assess the glove perforation rate, efficacy of double gloving, effect of duration of surgery, expertise of surgeon and operative urgency on the glove perforation rate in obstetrical and gynecologic operations.
METHODS: From February to September 2002, double glove protocol was made necessary for all major obstetrical and gynecologic procedures. The operating surgeon, first and second assistant were included in the study. Gloves damage was noted (overt by inspection, occult by hydroinsufflation technique).
RESULTS: Of the 156 procedures included in study, 32 procedures were performed (all emergency operations) single-gloved because surgeons found double gloving clumsy (56%), made it difficult to tie knots due to lack of dexterity (24%), or were too tight (20%). One thousand one hundred and twenty single gloves were examined after each procedure by hydroinsufflation. The overall perforation rate was 13.6% (single versus double outer gloves, 13.8% versus l3.2%, P > 0.05). Matching perforations were found in six cases (4.6%). Thus, the protection offered by double gloves was 95.4% even if the outer gloves were perforated. Four inner gloves had preexisting perforations. Sixty unused gloves checked similarly revealed a perforation rate of 1.6%. Emergency cases had higher perforation rate compared to elective surgeries (16.6% versus 10.8%, P < 0.00 1). Surgeries lasting for more than 40 min had a higher perforation rate compared to those finished in less than or equal to 40 min (18.6% versus 7.6%, P < 0.001). The middle finger of the left hand was the most commonly involved. The surgeon, first assistant and second assistant were involved in 73.6, 23.3 and 3.2% cases, respectively.
CONCLUSION: Double gloving offers considerable protection against exposure to contaminants in the blood and body fluids of the patient and should be made routine, especially in developing countries where HIV, hepatitis B and C are widely prevalent. Double gloving should be made mandatory in emergency procedures, which have a higher perforation rate due to operative urgency, and gloves should be changed in operations lasting for more than 40 min to ensure integrity of barrier.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15238110     DOI: 10.1111/j.1447-0756.2004.00201.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Obstet Gynaecol Res        ISSN: 1341-8076            Impact factor:   1.730


  5 in total

1.  Evaluation of two methods of determining the efficacies of two alcohol-based hand rubs for surgical hand antisepsis.

Authors:  Günter Kampf; Christiane Ostermeyer; Peter Heeg; Daryl Paulson
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 4.792

2.  Anticipated detection of imminent surgeon-patient barrier breaches. A prospective randomized controlled trial using an indicator underglove system.

Authors:  Jean-Louis Caillot; Philippe Paparel; Eric Arnal; Vincent Schreiber; Eric J Voiglio
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 3.352

Review 3.  Double gloving to reduce surgical cross-infection.

Authors:  J Tanner; H Parkinson
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2006-07-19

4.  Incidence and patterns of surgical glove perforations: experience from Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

Authors:  Abebe Bekele; Nardos Makonnen; Lidya Tesfaye; Mulat Taye
Journal:  BMC Surg       Date:  2017-03-20       Impact factor: 2.102

5.  Perforation rates in double latex gloves and protective effects of outer work gloves in a postmortem examination room: A STROBE-compliant study.

Authors:  Nozomi Idota; Mami Nakamura; Yoshihisa Akasaka; Hajime Tsuboi; Risa Bando; Hiroshi Ikegaya
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2019-07       Impact factor: 1.817

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.