A randomized trial comparing the intraoperative durability of double-gloving with Biogel® surgical gloves to 3 comparators.


Journal

Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE
ISSN: 2732-494X
Titre abrégé: Antimicrob Steward Healthc Epidemiol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9918266096106676

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2024
Historique:
received: 07 05 2024
revised: 08 08 2024
accepted: 08 08 2024
medline: 21 10 2024
pubmed: 21 10 2024
entrez: 21 10 2024
Statut: epublish

Résumé

To determine and compare the intraoperative durability of 4 major surgical glove brands. This study is a randomized open-label clinical trial in which surgical gloves from 4 manufacturers are randomized to 5 surgical subspecialty study groups: (1) orthopedic surgery, (2) neurosurgery, (3) colorectal surgery, (4) trauma or acute general surgery, and (5) cardiac and plastic surgeries. The study was divided into 10 periods, with a cross-over design, and was conducted at a tertiary care academic medical center. Participants were licensed and certified physicians, physicians-in-training, scrub nurses, or technicians working within the sterile field. Participants from each study group were randomly assigned to 1 of 4 surgical glove manufacturer types and subsequently rotated through the other 3 glove brands such that each participant acted as their own control in the sequential cross-over design. The primary outcome was to determine and compare the intraoperative failure rate of Biogel® Sterile Surgical undergloves against sterile surgical undergloves from 3 other manufacturers, both as a combined competitor group and individually. There were no differences between brands with respect to the primary outcome of underglove intraoperative failures. Brand 1 wearers were slightly more likely to detect glove failures when they occurred. The durability of surgical gloves intraoperatively is similar across 4 major glove manufacturers. Detection of intraoperative failures is infrequent, though specific glove characteristics may promote enhanced detection. Recognition of glove perforations intraoperatively is important in the maintenance of a maximally sterile field. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03344354.

Identifiants

pubmed: 39430795
doi: 10.1017/ash.2024.431
pii: S2732494X24004315
pmc: PMC11488470
doi:

Banques de données

ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT03344354']

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

e169

Informations de copyright

© Cambridge University Press 2024.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

None.

Auteurs

Michelle Doll (M)

Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, Richmond, VA, USA.

Asmaa Namoos (A)

Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, Richmond, VA, USA.

Le Kang (L)

Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, Richmond, VA, USA.

Jibanananda Satpathy (J)

Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, Richmond, VA, USA.

Michael J Feldman (MJ)

Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, Richmond, VA, USA.

Anthony Cassano (A)

Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, Richmond, VA, USA.

Jaime Bohl (J)

Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, Richmond, VA, USA.

Michel B Aboutanos (MB)

Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, Richmond, VA, USA.

Brian Cameron (B)

Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, Richmond, VA, USA.

Jason Kim (J)

Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, Richmond, VA, USA.

Celine Asbury (C)

Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, Richmond, VA, USA.

Mahdee Haque (M)

Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, Richmond, VA, USA.

Olivia Hess (O)

Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, Richmond, VA, USA.

Henrik Ahlbom (H)

Molnlycke Healthcare, Gothenburg, Sweden.

Gonzalo Bearman (G)

Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, Richmond, VA, USA.

Classifications MeSH