Avoiding problems: evidence-based selection of medical gloves

Allergenic contact reaction to glove proteins and residual chemicals increased from 1980 onwards; circumstantial and technical evidence indicates that change from reusable to disposable latex gloves was a causative factor. Several protein fractions are potentially allergenic; if low protein gloves contain a dominant protein fraction, people with sensitivity may still have an adverse reaction. Use of chlorinated powder-free gloves reduces risk of allergenic reaction; other powder-free gloves may still pose a contact risk to patients. Adverse comparative tests of vinyl vs latex medical gloves may, in some cases, have used non-medical gloves without assessment of initial quality or involved an unrealistic test method; these have discouraged use of a non-allergenic alternative to latex gloves. Vinyl medical glove properties are reviewed. Nitrile examination gloves offer better protection than latex types when handling lipid-soluble substances and chemicals. Properties of medical gloves made from other materials are described.     

Disposable non-sterile gloves: a policy for appropriate usage

Since the implementation of universal precautions, the use of disposable gloves has become part of everyday clinical practice. Guidance has been published to advise healthcare workers of the risks of latex allergies associated with the wearing of powdered latex gloves. The literature supports the use of gloves when contact with blood or body fluids is likely. However, an audit of glove usage indicated that practitioners were wearing gloves inappropriately, i.e. to wash patients (20%). The results of this study also demonstrated that a small percentage of staff (20%) were wearing vinyl gloves to deal with blood spillages and for venepuncture (13%) and cannulation (10%). A glove policy and a flow chart to assist staff in the selection of gloves were introduced. An educational programme for all hospital staff was commenced. These measures can assist healthcare workers in making an informed choice regarding glove usage.     

A laboratory-based study to assess the performance of surgical gloves

The inherent tear resistance and elasticity of latex and the touch sensitivity it provides has made it the traditional material of choice for surgical gloves, protecting both health care workers and patients from the transmission of bloodborne infections. Although increased incidence of latex allergy has led to increased use of nonlatex surgical gloves, the effectiveness of these gloves as a barrier to infection has not been examined thoroughly. This laboratory-based study compared the performance of latex and nonlatex surgical gloves in a simulated stress protocol. The propensity of surgical gloves to fail was dependent on glove material, manufacturer, and stress. Nonlatex neoprene and nitrile gloves were comparable to latex and can provide a good alternative to latex for allergic patients and health care workers. In this study, isoprene was found to be inferior to latex and other nonlatex materials. The presence or absence of glove powder had no significant influence on the probability of glove failure. AORN J 71 (April 2003) 772-779.     

Biomechanical performance of powder-free examination gloves

Biomechanical performance studies were undertaken for powder-free, latex and nitrile examination gloves. Using standardized tests, examination glove performance was judged by measuring glove thickness, glove puncture force, glove tape adhesion force, glove donning force, glove stiffness, and immediate unrecovered stretch. Even though the nitrile examination gloves were thinner than the latex examination gloves, they exhibited a greater puncture resistance. In addition, tape adherence to the N-Dex nitrile glove was the lowest. Moreover, measurements of the handling characteristics of the nitrile examination gloves demonstrated that they are an acceptable alternative to latex examination gloves. While these biomechanical studies demonstrate the superiority of the nitrile examination gloves, clinical glove evaluation is still needed to determine their performance in the health care setting.     

Health effects associated with medical glove use

Adverse reactions to medical gloves represent an important public health issue. Accordingly, there is increasing interest in understanding the information reported to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) describing health effects associated with the use of medical gloves. This article provides a retrospective analysis and summary of health effects associated with medical glove use reported to the FDA. The FDA's medical device adverse event databases were searched via computer using keywords to identify reports of reactions associated with any type of medical glove. Demographic and clinical information abstracted from these reports was used to perform frequency and trend analyses. The reported medical glove-related events, including the noted trends in reporting, suggest the need for further study and continued monitoring of such reports. AORN J 76 (July 2002) 88-96.     

Anatomy of a defective barrier: sequential glove leak detection in a surgical and dental environment.

OBJECTIVES: a) To determine the frequency of perforations in latex surgical gloves before, during, and after surgical and dental procedures; b) to evaluate the topographical distribution of perforations in latex surgical gloves after surgical and dental procedures; and c) to validate methods of testing for latex surgical glove patency. DESIGN: Multitrial tests under in vitro conditions and a prospective sequential patient study using consecutive testing. SETTING: An outpatient dental clinic at a university dental school, the operating suite in a medical school affiliated with the Veteran's Hospital, and a biomechanics laboratory. PERSONNEL: Surgeons, scrub nurses, and dental technicians participating in 50 surgical and 50 dental procedures. METHODS: We collected 679 latex surgical gloves after surgical procedures and tested them for patency by using a water pressure test. We also employed an electronic glove leak detector before donning, after sequential time intervals, and upon termination of 47 surgical (sequential surgical), 50 dental (sequential dental), and in three orthopedic cases where double gloving was used. The electronic glove leak detector was validated by using electronic point-by-point surface probing, fluorescein dye diffusion, as well as detecting glove punctures made with a 27-gauge needle. RESULTS: The random study indicated a leak rate of 33.0% (224 out of 679) in latex surgical gloves; the sequential surgical study demonstrated patency in 203 out of 347 gloves (58.5%); the sequential dental study showed 34 leaks in the 106 gloves used (32.1%); and with double gloving, the leak rate decreased to 25.0% (13 of 52 gloves tested). While the allowable FDA defect rate for unused latex surgical gloves is 1.5%, we noted defect rates in unused gloves of 5.5% in the sequential surgical, 1.9% in the sequential dental, and 4.0% in our electronic glove leak detector validating study. In the sequential surgical study, 52% of the leaks had occurred by 75 mins, and in the sequential dental study, 75% of the leaks developed by 30 mins. In terms of the anatomical localization, the thumb and forefinger accounted for more than 60% of the defects. There were no differences in the frequency of glove leaks between the left and right hand. Leak rates were highest for the surgeon (52%), followed by the first assistant (29%) and the scrub nurse (25%). No false negatives were noted using the electronic glove leak detector; one false positive was seen out of 225 gloves tested (0.44%), as noted in our validation studies. CONCLUSIONS: Significantly high glove leak rates were noted after surgical and dental procedures, indicating that the present day latex surgical gloves can become an incompetent barrier once they are used. Unused latex surgical gloves demonstrated a higher rate of defects than allowed by the Food and Drug Administration standards, indicating substantial noncompliance of quality control standards by manufacturers as well as inadequate governmental oversight. Double gloving, or the use of thicker latex surgical gloves, would probably reduce the frequency of glove leaks. Latex surgical gloves should be tested for patency before use and during surgical and dental procedures.     

The changing face of hand protection

Perioperative nurses are empowered to act as patient advocates. As such, it is their responsibility to critically evaluate all products used in the surgical environment, including gloves. A basic understanding of the history of surgical gloves, health issues associated with their use, glove materials, and the essential properties of hand scrubs can help perioperative nurses choose appropriate products. This article explores these issues so that nurses and other health care workers can develop a framework for making informed decisions based on clinical reasoning.     

A global inventory of hospitals using powder-free gloves: a search for principled medical leadership

Scientific experimental and clinical studies have demonstrated that cornstarch on surgical and examination gloves promotes disease by acting as a reactive foreign body in tissue and serving as a vector for latex allergy. Consequently, hospitals have selected an innovative glove selection program utilizing only powder-free gloves. Healthcare workers in emergency medical systems are now wearing powder-free, latex-free gloves to care for the growing number of patients sensitized to latex. A global Internet search has now identified 70 hospitals in the United States and three hospitals in Europe that use only powder-free gloves.     

Improving Glove Barrier Effectiveness

Perioperative staff members depend on surgical gloves to prevent disease transmission between themselves and patients, but these gloves frequently fail during use. Three approaches can make surgical gloves more effective barriers: preventing glove failures, monitoring glove integrity, and improving glove quality. Failure prevention includes modifying surgical techniques, improving instruments and equipment, streamlining teamwork, selecting the most appropriate gloves, double gloving, and performing preventive glove changes. Glove integrity monitoring can be performed visually or by feel, by wearing glove pairs with color-puncture indicators, or by using electronic monitoring devices. Glove quality improvements must be accompanied by testing methods that reflect in-use conditions. A glove rating system that is based on in-use performance may enhance glove safety substantially. AORN J 66 (Dec 1997) 1043–1063.     

Inadequate Standard for Glove Puncture Resistance: Allows Production of Gloves with Limited Puncture Resistance

The National Fire Protection Association has developed standards for glove puncture resistance using a metal puncture probe. Biomechanical performance studies have demonstrated that glove puncture resistance to the probe is significantly greater than that of the hypodermic needle, suggesting that these standards have no clinical relevance. These standards give a false sense of security to health care personnel and sanction the production and use of gloves that give inadequate protection. The result is potentially harmful for medical personnel.     

Exploring the benefits of double gloving during surgery

Breaches in the glove barrier pose a risk for transmission of bloodborne pathogens during surgical procedures. Double gloving or double gloving with an indicator glove system may provide added protection. For this 24-month study, we used a comparative design to examine the effect of double gloving with inner indicator gloves on the durability of inner gloves and the detection of glove tears or perforations during surgery. The frequency of seeing blood on the hand after surgery was greater with single gloving than with double gloving, and the frequency of changing gloves during surgery was significantly higher among those who double gloved with an indicator glove system versus double gloving alone. The majority of health care providers in our study expressed favorable views about double gloving.     

Biogel Skinsense N: surgical glove management for latex allergies

Healthcare staff with a high occupational exposure to latex gloves, such as those who work in the operating theatre, have a higher than average incidence of latex allergies. Certain patient groups are also known to be considered "high risk" for latex allergies. When wearing gloves, staff allergic to latex and those working with patients allergic to latex must wear latex-free gloves to protect themselves and their patients. Of all the different types of gloves available--examination, medical or diagnostic--surgical gloves have to meet the highest standards, offering both protection and comfort. However, latex-free surgical gloves have previously lacked some of the "comfort" qualities of natural latex. This article describes appropriate glove management for latex allergies and looks at the new generation of latex-free surgical gloves.     

The use of latex gloves in the school setting.

In 1987, when the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommended the use of universal precautions in response to the HIV/AIDS epidemic, the demand for medical gloves dramatically increased. Unfortunately, the manufacturing techniques for the most widely-used gloves-natural rubber latex-also changed, in order to expedite production. These changes resulted in an increase in latex allergies, because excessive residual proteins that cause allergies remained on the gloves and became airborne with the gloves' high level of powder. This allergy concern is especially relevant in the school setting where school nurses are not only concerned about their own well-being, but the well-being of the children in their care. Today, latex gloves are still the most widely used of any medical gloves, but they have much lower levels of protein and are available in low- or no-powder. This article examines whether the current latex gloves indeed reduce the allergenicity of the gloves and how allergy and barrier protection data can assist school nurses in making informed glove choices.     

Surgical glove perforation among nurses in ophthalmic surgery: A case‐control study

Many of the ophthalmic surgical instruments are extremely fine and sharp. Due to the dim light environment required for ophthalmic surgical procedures, the passing of sharp instruments among surgeons and scrub nurses also poses a risk for glove perforations. A case‐control study was performed to determine the number and site of perforations in the surgical gloves used by a group of scrub nurses during ophthalmic surgery. All six nurses working in an eye and refractive surgery centre in Hong Kong participated in the study. A total of 100 (50 pairs) used surgical gloves were collected following 50 ophthalmic surgeries. Fifty pairs of new surgical gloves were also collected. Every collected surgical glove underwent the water leak test. The surgical procedure perforation rate was 8%, and none of the perforations were detected by the scrub nurses. No perforations were found in any unused gloves. The findings indicate that glove perforations for scrub nurses during ophthalmic surgery do occur and mostly go unnoticed. Future studies should continue to explore factors contributing to surgical glove perforation.     

Latex glove disorders: a management strategy for reducing skin sensitivity

The use of latex gloves by health care workers has increased over recent years. Proteins within the latex gloves and chemical additives during the manufacturing process have been linked to allergic skin and systemic disorders. Evidence suggests that latex-related skin disorders are increasing. Unless more stringent measures to control prolonged contact with latex gloves are implemented, skin disorders will continue to increase. While employees have a professional responsibility to reduce longer contact with latex gloves and use other safer alternatives, employers may also contribute through better education provisions, more strict monitoring and control of glove usage and purchasing gloves that are safer. An Infection Control Nurse can support both employees and management by developing and supporting better education and guidance for glove usage and an Employee Health Nurse could provide better care and support to affected workers. Glove manufacturers should identify the level of each protein in their gloves, the health risks involved and undertake new research to produce more hypoallergenic gloves. Collaborative efforts among employees, employers, researchers and glove manufacturers are needed to prevent the spiraling latex health risks to health care workers getting worse.     

Choosing the right surgical glove: an overview and update

Sterile surgical gloves are routinely worn during all invasive procedures to prevent the two-way transmission of pathogens between the surgical team and the patient. This reduces the risk of surgical-site infections and blood-borne diseases. Since their introduction to the operating room over 100 years ago, surgical gloves, and the materials used to make them, have continued to evolve in line with ever-changing healthcare demands. Following recent developments in surgical glove technologies, including de-proteinized natural rubber latex and newer gloving methods such as triple gloving, it is timely that an overview and update of surgical gloves is given. By providing information on latex-associated allergies, glove materials, gloving methods and glove protection, this article will enable practitioners to choose the most appropriate surgical glove.     

断指再植手术中定时更换外科手套的效果研究

目的探讨断指再植手术中每2.5h更换外科手套的效果,为临床护理提供依据。方法选择2014年4-12月我院收治的断指再植手术110例患者,随机分为对照组58例,观察组52例,其中,观察组采取每2.5h更换手套的干预措施,比较两组手术中手套破损情况。结果对照组55%的手术出现手套破损,观察组26.9%的手术出现手套破损,差异有统计学意义(P0.05);观察组手套破损率为3%,对照组手套破损率为10%,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论断指再植手术中每2.5h更换外科手套能明显降低手术中手套破损。     

Conversion to low-protein, powder-free surgical gloves: is it worth the cost?

This study was conducted to determine changes in overall costs associated with conversion to powder-free gloves including cost of workers' compensation cases for natural rubber latex (NRL)-related symptoms and health care workers' glove satisfaction. The study, a 2-year, longitudinal design with retrospective and prospective aspects, was developed to determine health care worker use of powder-free, low-protein NRL gloves, sensitization, cost, and glove satisfaction. Informed consent was obtained from 103 health care workers. Prior to glove conversion, nearly one-half (44%, 36 of 82) of the operating room staff reported symptoms related to NRL exposure. At the end of the 14-month data collection period, only 27% (22 of 82, McNemar test = .007) reported symptoms related to NRL exposure. Additionally, a cost savings of 10,000 dollars per year for gloves was evident with reports of increased user satisfaction. This study demonstrated that conversion to the use of powder-free, low-protein NRL gloves not only reduces health care worker NRL symptoms, but also positively affects the costs of glove purchases and workers' compensation.     

Surgical Glove Failures in Clinical Practice Settings

Health care personnel often pay little attention to the barrier effectiveness of the surgical gloves they use in clinical settings. They may assume that all surgical gloves provide adequate protection against the transfer of bloodborne pathogens, chemicals, or mutagenic substances. Perioperative staff members frequently are unaware that their surgical gloves have failed until they find blood on their hands after operative procedures are completed. In this first article of a three-part series, the authors review current surgical glove testing standards, define surgical glove failure, and describe the reasons that surgical glove failure occurs in clinical practice settings. AORN J 66 (Oct 1997) 660–673.     

New advances in electronic devices for hole detection.

Holes in surgical gloves are considered to be an important source of transmission of pathogens between surgeon and patient. Two new glove hole detectors have been devised to alert the surgeon to the presence of holes. These devices have been evaluated using six powder-free and seven powdered varieties of surgical gloves that were either dry or exposed to hydration. Eight of the 13 surgical gloves hydrated rapidly with water, altering their resistance to the conduction of electricity. Because the Barrier Integrity Monitor? only has a hydration monitor, 68 false positives occurred during the evaluation, indicating to the surgeon that he/she should change gloves unnecessarily because the glove had no hole. In contrast, the Surgic Alert Monitor? (SAM?) had a hydration alarm as well as a glove hole detection alarm. During the 104 tests, the SAM? device showed no false positives. In the testing of five of the rapidly hydrating types of surgical gloves, the SAM? device could not reliably detect holes. On the basis of this study, the SAM? device, in conjunction with gloves that resist hydration, appeared to be a reliable hole detection monitor.