Perforations of tri-layer nitrile-latex and natural rubber latex gloves during ex-vivo equine intestinal anastomoses.
Journal
Veterinary surgery : VS
ISSN: 1532-950X
Titre abrégé: Vet Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8113214
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Aug 2021
Aug 2021
Historique:
revised:
25
02
2021
received:
04
06
2020
accepted:
24
03
2021
pubmed:
3
7
2021
medline:
26
10
2021
entrez:
2
7
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To compare perforation rates between tri-layer nitrile-latex and natural rubber latex surgical gloves after single-layer end-to-end jejunojejunal anastomoses in equine cadavers. Prospective randomized ex-vivo study. Pairs of surgical gloves (n = 46) worn during jejunojejunal anastomoses. Tri-layer nitrile-latex and rubber latex pairs of gloves were equally but randomly allocated to a right-handed surgeon performing 46 single-layer end-to-end jejunojejunal anastomoses on cadaveric material. Number and location of perforations were determined with the water leak test after each procedure. Ten unused pairs of both glove types were tested as controls. At least one perforation occurred in 41% (19/46) of the pairs of gloves. Glove perforations were present in 22% (5/23; 95% CI: 9-42) of tri-layer glove pairs and 61% (14/23; 95% CI: 41-78) of the rubber glove pairs. The odds of glove perforation were 5.6 times (p = .009, 95% CI: 1.5-20.5) lower when tri-layer rather than rubber gloves were used. The duration of procedure did not affect the risk of glove perforation (p = .679). No perforations were observed in the unused gloves. Perforations were less common when the surgeon wore tri-layer nitrile-latex gloves rather than to the natural rubber latex gloves tested in this study. Tri-layer nitrile-latex gloves were more resistant to perforations in experimental settings; further studies may confirm that they are also superior in a clinical setting.
Substances chimiques
Latex
0
Nitriles
0
Rubber
9006-04-6
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1250-1256Informations de copyright
© 2021 American College of Veterinary Surgeons.
Références
Lindsay S, Oates A, Bourdillon K. The detrimental impact of extracellular bacterial proteases on wound healing. Int Wound J. 2017;14:1237-1247.
Badia J, Casey A, Petrosillo N, et al. Impact of surgical site infection on healthcare costs and patient outcomes: a systematic review in six European countries. J Hosp Infect. 2017;96:1-15.
Verwilghen DR, Mainil J, Mastrocicco E, et al. Surgical hand antisepsis in veterinary practice: evaluation of soap scrubs and alcohol based rub techniques. Vet J. 2011;190:372-377.
MacDonald D, Morley P, Bailey J, et al. An examination of the occurrence of surgical wound infection following equine orthopaedic surgery (1981-1990). Equine Vet J. 1994;26:323-326.
Semevolos SA, Ducharme NG, Hackett RP. Clinical assessment and outcome of three techniques for jejunal resection and anastomosis in horses: 59 cases (1989-2000). J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2002;220:215-218.
Freeman DE, Hammock P, Baker GJ, et al. Short- and long-term survival and prevalence of postoperative ileus after small intestinal surgery in the horse. Equine Vet J. 2000;32:42-51.
Jones RD, Kania SA, Rohrbach BW, et al. Prevalence of oxacillin-and multidrug-resistant staphylococci in clinical samples from dogs: 1,772 samples (2001-2005). J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2007;230:221-227.
Verwilghen D. Surgical techniques. In: Auer JA, Stick JA, Kūmmerle JM, et al., eds. Equine Surgery. 5th ed. St. Louis, MO: Elsevier; 2019:198-213.
Verwilghen D. Preparation for surgery: decision making/operative risk, patient, facility, operating team. In: Auer JA, Stick JA, Kūmmerle JM, et al., eds. Equine Surgery. 5th ed. St. Louis, MO: Elsevier; 2019:143-183.
Allegranzi B, Bischoff P, Kubilay Z, et al. Global Guidelines for the Prevention of Surgical Site Infection. Torino TO, Italy: World Health Organization; 2016.
Eklund AM, Ojajärvi J, Laitinen K, et al. Glove punctures and postoperative skin flora of hands in cardiac surgery. Ann Thorac Surg. 2002;74:149-153.
Jid LQ, Ping MW, Chung WY, et al. Visible glove perforation in total knee arthroplasty: risk and consequences. J Orthop Surg. 2017;25:2309499017695610. https://doi.org/10.1177/2309499017695610.
Biermann NM, McClure J, Sanchez J, et al. Observational study on the occurrence of surgical glove perforation and associated risk factors in large animal surgery. Vet Surg. 2018;47:212-218.
Elce YA, Laverty S, Almeida da Silveira E, et al. Frequency of undetected glove perforation and associated risk factors in equine surgery. Vet Surg. 2016;45:1066-1070.
Hübner N-O, Goerdt A-M, Stanislawski N, et al. Bacterial migration through punctured surgical gloves under real surgical conditions. BMC Infect Dis. 2010;10:192.
Misteli H, Weber WP, Reck S, et al. Surgical glove perforation and the risk of surgical site infection. Arch Surg. 2009;144:553-558.
Hayes GM, Reynolds D, Moens NM, et al. Investigation of incidence and risk factors for surgical glove perforation in small animal surgery. Vet Surg. 2014;43:400-404.
Bardorf MH, Jäger B, Boeckmans E, et al. Influence of material properties on gloves' bacterial barrier efficacy in the presence of microperforation. Am J Infect Control. 2016;44:1645-1649.
Jackson EM, Williams FM, Neal JG, et al. Biomechanical performance of examination gloves. J Biomed Mater Res. 1999;48:572-577.
Patel H, Fleming G, Burke F. Puncture resistance and stiffness of nitrile and latex dental examination gloves. Br Dent J. 2004;196:695-700.
Korniewicz DM, El-Masri MM, Broyles JM, et al. A laboratory-based study to assess the performance of surgical gloves. AORN J. 2003;77:772-779.
Aldlyami E, Kulkarni A, Reed MR, et al. Latex-free gloves: safer for whom? J Arthroplasty. 2010;25:27-30.
Mylon P, Lewis R, Carré MJ, et al. A study of clinicians' views on medical gloves and their effect on manual performance. Am J Infect Control. 2014;42:48-54.
HaCU Ltd: Cardinal Health Protexis Latex Sterile Powder Free Surgical Gloves. www.safetygloves.co.uk, 2020 (https://www.safetygloves.co.uk/cardinal-health-protexis-latex-sterile-powder-free-surgical-gloves.html). Accessed August 22, 2020.
Health™ C: Cardinal Health™ PROTEXIS™ Surgical Gloves, in Health™ C (ed), 2019.
Orengo I, Pielop J, Ransdell BL. The use of a “no-touch” technique to reduce the incidence of glove perforation during suture needle adjustment. Dermatol Surg. 2003;29:1215-1216.
ASTM Designation: D 5151 19 standard test method for detection of holes in medical gloves. Annual Book of ASTM Standards. American Society for Testing and Materials: West Conshohocken, PA; 2015. https://doi.org/10.1520/D5151-19.
Hosmer DW Jr, Lemeshow S. Sturdivant RX: Applied Logistic Regression. Hoboken, New Jersey, United States: John Wiley & Sons; 2013.
Cardinal Health: Protexis™ Latex. Cardinal Health. 2019 (https://www.cardinalhealth.com/en/product-solutions/medical/gloves/surgical-gloves/latex-surgical-gloves/protexis-latex-surgical-gloves.html). Accessed August 6, 2020.
Medline Industries: Signature Latex Essential Surgical Gloves. 2019 (https://www.medline.com/product/Signature-Latex-Essential-Surgical-Gloves/Sterile-PF-Latex-Surgical-Gloves/Z05-PF145900?question=signature+latex&index=P1&indexCount=1). Accessed August 6, 2020.
Yeh Y-ST, Zhu D. Powder-free nitrile-coated gloves with an intermediate rubber-nitrile layer between the glove and the coating and method of making same, in: Vol Google Patents, 2002.
Al-Maiyah M, Bajwa A, Finn P, et al. Glove perforation and contamination in primary total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2005;87:556-559.
Goldman AH, Haug E, Owen JR, et al. High risk of surgical glove perforation from surgical rotatory instruments. Clin Orthop. 2016;474:2513-2517.
Burrow R, Pinchbeck G. Study of how frequently surgeons' gloves are perforated during operations. Vet Rec. 2006;158:558-561.
Wright K, Moran C, Briggs P. Glove perforation during hip arthroplasty. A randomised prospective study of a new taperpoint needle. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1993;75:918-920.
Makama JG, Okeme IM, Makama EJ, et al. Glove perforation rate in surgery: a randomized, controlled study to evaluate the efficacy of double gloving. Surg Infect (Larchmt). 2016;17:436-442.
Palmer J, Rickett J. The mechanisms and risks of surgical glove perforation. J Hosp Infect. 1992;22:279-286.
Tanner J. Surgical gloves: perforation and protection. J Perioper Pract. 2006;16:148-152.
Seki S. Suturing techniques of individual surgeons: differences in accuracy and mechanics. Jpn J Surg. 1989;19:424-431.
Meakin LB, Gilman OP, Parsons KJ, et al. Colored indicator undergloves increase the detection of glove perforations by surgeons during small animal orthopedic surgery: a randomized controlled trial. Vet Surg. 2016;45:709-714.
Character BJ, McLaughlin RM, Hedlund CS, et al. Postoperative integrity of veterinary surgical gloves. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc. 2003;39:311-320.
Tlili MA, Belgacem A, Sridi H, et al. Evaluation of surgical glove integrity and factors associated with glove defect. Am J Infect Control. 2018;46:30-33.
Sornsanee P, Jitprarop V, Tangboriboon N. Preparation polyisoprene (NR) and polyacrylonitrile rubber latex glove films by dipping ceramic hand molds process and their properties. Proc Defect Diffusion Forum. 2018;382:21-25.
Drabek T, Boucek CD, Buffington CW. Wearing the wrong size latex surgical gloves impairs manual dexterity. J Occup Environ Hyg. 2010;7:152-155.
Mischke C, Verbeek JH, Saarto A, et al. Gloves, extra gloves or special types of gloves for preventing percutaneous exposure injuries in healthcare personnel. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;3:CD009573. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD009573.pub2.