Non-sterile examination gloves and sterile surgical gloves: which are more sustainable?

Gloves, Protective Gloves, Surgical Humans Latex
Environmental sustainability Life-cycle assessment Non-sterile gloves Sterile surgical gloves Sustainability in healthcare

Journal

The Journal of hospital infection
ISSN: 1532-2939
Titre abrégé: J Hosp Infect
Pays: England
ID NLM: 8007166

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Dec 2021
Historique:
received: 05 08 2021
revised: 05 10 2021
accepted: 05 10 2021
pubmed: 17 10 2021
medline: 15 12 2021
entrez: 16 10 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Healthcare professionals should consider environmental sustainability when using personal protective equipment (PPE). One of the most frequently used items of PPE in medical settings are gloves. This study aims to quantify the environmental impact of sterile versus non-sterile gloves using the life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology. This study used three glove types: non-sterile gloves and sterile gloves (latex and latex-free). Sixteen different environmental impact categories were used to demonstrate the impact of each glove type. Non-sterile gloves had the least environmental impact in all categories. The two types of sterile gloves, non-latex (synthetic rubber) and latex (natural rubber), performed similarly, although the non-latex gloves had a greater impact on ozone depletion, mineral use and ionizing radiation. For climate change impact, sterile latex gloves were 11.6 times higher than non-sterile gloves. This study found that for both sterile type gloves (latex and non-latex), the manufacture of the gloves contributes to the most considerable environmental impact, with an average of 64.37% for sterile latex gloves and 60.48% for non-latex sterile gloves. Using the LCA methodology, this study quantitatively demonstrated the environmental impact of sterile versus non-sterile gloves.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Healthcare professionals should consider environmental sustainability when using personal protective equipment (PPE). One of the most frequently used items of PPE in medical settings are gloves.
AIM OBJECTIVE
This study aims to quantify the environmental impact of sterile versus non-sterile gloves using the life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology.
METHODS METHODS
This study used three glove types: non-sterile gloves and sterile gloves (latex and latex-free). Sixteen different environmental impact categories were used to demonstrate the impact of each glove type.
FINDINGS RESULTS
Non-sterile gloves had the least environmental impact in all categories. The two types of sterile gloves, non-latex (synthetic rubber) and latex (natural rubber), performed similarly, although the non-latex gloves had a greater impact on ozone depletion, mineral use and ionizing radiation. For climate change impact, sterile latex gloves were 11.6 times higher than non-sterile gloves. This study found that for both sterile type gloves (latex and non-latex), the manufacture of the gloves contributes to the most considerable environmental impact, with an average of 64.37% for sterile latex gloves and 60.48% for non-latex sterile gloves.
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
Using the LCA methodology, this study quantitatively demonstrated the environmental impact of sterile versus non-sterile gloves.

Identifiants

DOI: 10.1016/j.jhin.2021.10.001 PMID: 34655693
pubmed: 34655693
pii: S0195-6701(21)00349-2
doi: 10.1016/j.jhin.2021.10.001
pii:
doi:

Substances chimiques

Latex 0

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

87-95

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2021 The Healthcare Infection Society. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

H Jamal (H)

Department of Paediatric Dentistry, Eastman Dental Institute, University College London, London, UK. Electronic address: hasan.jamal.18@ucl.ac.uk.

A Lyne (A)

Department of Paediatric Dentistry, Eastman Dental Institute, University College London, London, UK.

P Ashley (P)

Department of Paediatric Dentistry, Eastman Dental Institute, University College London, London, UK.

B Duane (B)

Trinity College Dublin, Department of Child and Public Dental Health, Dublin, Ireland.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female

Evaluation of Low-Value Services Across Major Medicare Advantage Insurers and Traditional Medicare.

Ciara Duggan, Adam L Beckman, Ishani Ganguli et al.
1.00
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C

Effectiveness of Virtual Yoga for Chronic Low Back Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Hallie Tankha, Devyn Gaskins, Amanda Shallcross et al.
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH

questionsmedicales.fr › Technologie, industrie et agriculture › Produits manufacturés › Dispositifs de protection › Équipement de protection individuelle › Vêtements de protection › Gants de protection › Non-sterile examination gloves and sterile...
questionsmedicales.fr › Technologie, industrie et agriculture › Produits manufacturés › Dispositifs de protection › Équipement de protection individuelle › Vêtements de protection › Gants de protection › Gants de chirurgie › Non-sterile examination gloves and sterile...
questionsmedicales.fr › Eucaryotes › Animaux › Chordés › Vertébrés › Mammifères › Eutheria › Primates › Haplorhini › Catarrhini › Hominidae › Humains › Non-sterile examination gloves and sterile...
questionsmedicales.fr › Technologie, industrie et agriculture › Produits manufacturés › Matériaux biomédicaux et dentaires › Polymères › Latex › Non-sterile examination gloves and sterile...