Medical glove durability during exposure to different solvent agents: an ex-vivo experimental study.

IF 2.6 Q1 SURGERY
Ashley Herkins, Katrina Cornish
{"title":"Medical glove durability during exposure to different solvent agents: an ex-vivo experimental study.","authors":"Ashley Herkins, Katrina Cornish","doi":"10.1186/s13037-024-00400-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Medical professionals are constantly exposed to bodily fluids and sanitizing agents during routine medical procedures. Unbeknownst to many healthcare workers, however, the barrier integrity of medical gloves can be altered when exposed to these substances, potentially resulting in exposure to dangerous pathogens.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This experimental study was designed to test the hypothesis that the durability of both natural and synthetic solvent-exposed medical gloves will be lower than the durability of the gloves in air. The testing consisted of a sample of commercially available medical gloves exposed to 70% ethanol, phosphate buffered saline, and deionized water, aimed at simulating the environments in which medical gloves are commonly worn. Gloves were included in this study based on their performance in previous durability studies in air. Data were collected over a period of three months. The glove assessment device automatically detects pinhole-sized perforations in medical gloves, eliminating the need to visually inspect each glove. Relative durability was measured as the average number of sandpaper touches until glove puncture.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Four out of five glove brands performed better when exposed to all three solvents than in air, which is likely due to slippage in the interface between the wet glove and the sandpaper. Sensicare Micro, a polyisoprene surgical glove, had the most consistent durability in all three solvents tested. A two-way ANOVA revealed that both glove brand (P = 0.0001), solvent (P = 0.0001), and their interaction (P = 0.0040, α = 0.05) significantly affected average glove durability.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Glove durability did not remain consistent in 70% ethanol, phosphate buffered saline, deionized water, and air. These results make it clear that additional testing and labeling information would help healthcare workers select gloves for use in specific environments to ensure the best barrier protection against disease or toxins.</p>","PeriodicalId":46782,"journal":{"name":"Patient Safety in Surgery","volume":"18 1","pages":"19"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11129492/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Patient Safety in Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13037-024-00400-4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Medical professionals are constantly exposed to bodily fluids and sanitizing agents during routine medical procedures. Unbeknownst to many healthcare workers, however, the barrier integrity of medical gloves can be altered when exposed to these substances, potentially resulting in exposure to dangerous pathogens.

Methods: This experimental study was designed to test the hypothesis that the durability of both natural and synthetic solvent-exposed medical gloves will be lower than the durability of the gloves in air. The testing consisted of a sample of commercially available medical gloves exposed to 70% ethanol, phosphate buffered saline, and deionized water, aimed at simulating the environments in which medical gloves are commonly worn. Gloves were included in this study based on their performance in previous durability studies in air. Data were collected over a period of three months. The glove assessment device automatically detects pinhole-sized perforations in medical gloves, eliminating the need to visually inspect each glove. Relative durability was measured as the average number of sandpaper touches until glove puncture.

Results: Four out of five glove brands performed better when exposed to all three solvents than in air, which is likely due to slippage in the interface between the wet glove and the sandpaper. Sensicare Micro, a polyisoprene surgical glove, had the most consistent durability in all three solvents tested. A two-way ANOVA revealed that both glove brand (P = 0.0001), solvent (P = 0.0001), and their interaction (P = 0.0040, α = 0.05) significantly affected average glove durability.

Conclusions: Glove durability did not remain consistent in 70% ethanol, phosphate buffered saline, deionized water, and air. These results make it clear that additional testing and labeling information would help healthcare workers select gloves for use in specific environments to ensure the best barrier protection against disease or toxins.

医用手套在暴露于不同溶剂时的耐久性:一项体外实验研究。
背景:医务人员在日常医疗过程中经常接触体液和消毒剂。然而,许多医护人员并不知道,医用手套在接触这些物质时,其屏障完整性会发生改变,从而可能导致接触危险的病原体:这项实验研究的目的是测试一个假设,即暴露在天然和合成溶剂中的医用手套的耐久性会低于其在空气中的耐久性。测试包括将市售医用手套样品暴露在 70% 的乙醇、磷酸盐缓冲盐水和去离子水中,目的是模拟医用手套通常的佩戴环境。根据之前在空气中的耐久性研究中的表现,将手套纳入了这项研究。数据收集为期三个月。手套评估装置可自动检测医用手套上针孔大小的穿孔,无需对每只手套进行目测。相对耐久性是以手套穿孔前砂纸接触的平均次数来衡量的:五个品牌的手套中有四个在三种溶剂中的表现都比在空气中要好,这可能是由于湿手套和砂纸之间的界面滑动造成的。聚异戊二烯手术手套 Sensicare Micro 在三种溶剂测试中的耐用性最为稳定。双向方差分析显示,手套品牌(P = 0.0001)、溶剂(P = 0.0001)和它们之间的交互作用(P = 0.0040,α = 0.05)对手套的平均耐用性有显著影响:手套在 70% 乙醇、磷酸盐缓冲盐水、去离子水和空气中的耐久性并不一致。这些结果表明,额外的测试和标签信息将有助于医护人员选择在特定环境中使用的手套,以确保对疾病或毒素提供最佳的屏障保护。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
8.10%
发文量
37
审稿时长
9 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信