Assessment of Protective Gloves for Use with Airfed Suits.

Annals of Occupational Hygiene Pub Date : 2015-10-01 Epub Date: 2015-08-13 DOI:10.1093/annhyg/mev039
Claire E Millard, Nicholas P Vaughan
{"title":"Assessment of Protective Gloves for Use with Airfed Suits.","authors":"Claire E Millard,&nbsp;Nicholas P Vaughan","doi":"10.1093/annhyg/mev039","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Gloves are often needed for hand protection at work, but they can impair manual dexterity, especially if they are multilayered or ill-fitting. This article describes two studies of gloves to be worn with airfed suits (AFS) for nuclear decommissioning or containment level 4 (CL4) microbiological work. Both sets of workers wear multiple layers of gloves for protection and to accommodate decontamination procedures. Nuclear workers are also often required to wear cut-resistant gloves as an extra layer of protection. A total of 15 subjects volunteered to take part in manual dexterity testing of the different gloving systems. The subjects' hands were measured to ensure that the appropriate sized gloves were used. The gloves were tested with the subjects wearing the complete clothing ensembles appropriate to the work, using a combination of standard dexterity tests: the nine-hole peg test; a pin test adapted from the European Standard for protective gloves, the Purdue Pegboard test, and the Minnesota turning test. Specialized tests such as a hand tool test were used to test nuclear gloves, and laboratory-type manipulation tasks were used to test CL4 gloves. Subjective assessments of temperature sensation and skin wettedness were made before and after the dexterity tests of the nuclear gloves only. During all assessments, we made observations and questioned the subjects about ergonomic issues related to the clothing ensembles. Overall, the results show that the greater the thickness of the gloves and the number of layers the more the levels of manual dexterity performance are degraded. The nuclear cut-resistant gloves with the worst level of dexterity were stiff and inflexible and the subjects experienced problems picking up small items and bending their hands. The work also highlighted other factors that affect manual dexterity performance, including proper sizing, interactions with the other garments worn at the time, and the work equipment in use. In conclusion, when evaluating gloves for use in the workplace it is important to use tests that reflect the working environment and always to consider the balance between protection and usability. </p>","PeriodicalId":8458,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Occupational Hygiene","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/annhyg/mev039","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Occupational Hygiene","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/annhyg/mev039","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2015/8/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Gloves are often needed for hand protection at work, but they can impair manual dexterity, especially if they are multilayered or ill-fitting. This article describes two studies of gloves to be worn with airfed suits (AFS) for nuclear decommissioning or containment level 4 (CL4) microbiological work. Both sets of workers wear multiple layers of gloves for protection and to accommodate decontamination procedures. Nuclear workers are also often required to wear cut-resistant gloves as an extra layer of protection. A total of 15 subjects volunteered to take part in manual dexterity testing of the different gloving systems. The subjects' hands were measured to ensure that the appropriate sized gloves were used. The gloves were tested with the subjects wearing the complete clothing ensembles appropriate to the work, using a combination of standard dexterity tests: the nine-hole peg test; a pin test adapted from the European Standard for protective gloves, the Purdue Pegboard test, and the Minnesota turning test. Specialized tests such as a hand tool test were used to test nuclear gloves, and laboratory-type manipulation tasks were used to test CL4 gloves. Subjective assessments of temperature sensation and skin wettedness were made before and after the dexterity tests of the nuclear gloves only. During all assessments, we made observations and questioned the subjects about ergonomic issues related to the clothing ensembles. Overall, the results show that the greater the thickness of the gloves and the number of layers the more the levels of manual dexterity performance are degraded. The nuclear cut-resistant gloves with the worst level of dexterity were stiff and inflexible and the subjects experienced problems picking up small items and bending their hands. The work also highlighted other factors that affect manual dexterity performance, including proper sizing, interactions with the other garments worn at the time, and the work equipment in use. In conclusion, when evaluating gloves for use in the workplace it is important to use tests that reflect the working environment and always to consider the balance between protection and usability.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

充气服防护手套的评定。
工作时通常需要手套来保护手,但它们会损害手的灵活性,特别是如果它们是多层的或不合适的。本文介绍了两项关于核退役或4级安全壳(CL4)微生物工作中充气服(AFS)所戴手套的研究。两组工作人员都戴着多层手套进行保护和消毒程序。核工人还经常被要求戴上防割伤手套,作为额外的一层保护。共有15名受试者自愿参加了不同手套系统的手灵巧性测试。研究人员测量了受试者的手,以确保使用了合适尺寸的手套。受试者穿着适合工作的全套服装,对手套进行测试,使用标准灵巧性测试的组合:九孔钉测试;针测试改编自欧洲标准的防护手套,普渡钉板测试和明尼苏达转弯测试。专门的测试,如手动工具测试,用于测试核手套,实验室类型的操作任务,用于测试CL4手套。仅在核手套灵巧性测试前后对温度感觉和皮肤湿润度进行主观评估。在所有的评估中,我们进行了观察,并询问了与服装套装相关的人体工程学问题。总体而言,结果表明,手套的厚度和层数越大,手灵巧性能的水平就越低。灵敏性最差的抗核割手套是僵硬和不灵活的,受试者在拿起小物品和弯曲双手时遇到了问题。这项工作还强调了影响手工灵巧性能的其他因素,包括适当的尺寸,与其他服装的相互作用,以及使用的工作设备。总之,在评估工作场所使用的手套时,重要的是要使用反映工作环境的测试,并始终考虑保护和可用性之间的平衡。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
2 months
×
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