OBJECTIVES: (a) To compare the effectiveness of five cloth gloves for cut resistance and their ability to prevent inner latex glove perforation. (b) To evaluate the safety, efficacy, and comfort of the outer gloves when reused. SETTING: Tertiary care level I trauma hospital and biomechanics laboratory. METHODS: Laboratory evaluation consisting of assessing cut resistance and fabric deterioration and clinical assessment of all cloth gloves worn as a liner between two latex gloves. RESULTS: Laboratory testing demonstrated significant differences in cut resistance, with gloves divided into three groups: most resistant (Centurion, which required over 3,000 slices or 1,300 chops to failure), resistant (MedArmor, failing at eighty-five slices or 121 chops; Paraderm, failing at thirty-eight slices or ninety-four chops; and Repel, failing at forty-six slices or seventy-five chops), and least resistant (Protek, failing at two slices and less than two chops). Clinically, 3 percent of all the inner latex gloves demonstrated a perforation, with no violation of the skin in any of the five types of cloth gloves used. Only the Protek and MedArmor cloth gloves were positively ranked for comfort. CONCLUSION: All gloves provided equal protection with respect to inner latex glove perforation during all of the orthopaedic procedures, with comfort being the most important variable. Gloves should be selected based on comfort, because it appears that all gloves provide equal protection during surgery regardless of the material woven into the fabric.
OBJECTIVES: (a) To compare the effectiveness of five cloth gloves for cut resistance and their ability to prevent inner latex glove perforation. (b) To evaluate the safety, efficacy, and comfort of the outer gloves when reused. SETTING: Tertiary care level I trauma hospital and biomechanics laboratory. METHODS: Laboratory evaluation consisting of assessing cut resistance and fabric deterioration and clinical assessment of all cloth gloves worn as a liner between two latex gloves. RESULTS: Laboratory testing demonstrated significant differences in cut resistance, with gloves divided into three groups: most resistant (Centurion, which required over 3,000 slices or 1,300 chops to failure), resistant (MedArmor, failing at eighty-five slices or 121 chops; Paraderm, failing at thirty-eight slices or ninety-four chops; and Repel, failing at forty-six slices or seventy-five chops), and least resistant (Protek, failing at two slices and less than two chops). Clinically, 3 percent of all the inner latex gloves demonstrated a perforation, with no violation of the skin in any of the five types of cloth gloves used. Only the Protek and MedArmor cloth gloves were positively ranked for comfort. CONCLUSION: All gloves provided equal protection with respect to inner latex glove perforation during all of the orthopaedic procedures, with comfort being the most important variable. Gloves should be selected based on comfort, because it appears that all gloves provide equal protection during surgery regardless of the material woven into the fabric.
Authors: Vincenzo Giordano; Hilton Augusto Koch; Juliano de Sousa Prado; Leonardo Schiavo de Morais; Rafael de Araújo Hara; Felipe Serrão de Souza; Ney Pecegueiro do Amaral Journal: Patient Saf Surg Date: 2014-06-17