Perforation of Surgical Gloves during Lower Extremity Fracture Surgery and Hip Joint Replacement Surgery.
- Author:
Sang Wook LEE
1
;
Myung Rae CHO
;
Ho Hyoung LEE
;
Won Kee CHOI
;
Joo Hwan LEE
Author Information
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords: Perforation; Double glove; Fracture surgery; Hip joint replacement surgery
- MeSH: Gloves, Surgical*; Hand; Hip Joint*; Humans; Lower Extremity*; Prevalence
- From:Hip & Pelvis 2015;27(1):17-22
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
- Abstract: PURPOSE: To assess the frequencies and sites of surgical glove perforations in lower extremity fracture surgery and hip joint replacement (HJR) surgery. Additionally, we also studied the usefulness of an indicator system glove. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We assessed surgical glove perforations in 30 cases of lower extremity fracture surgery and 18 cases of HJR surgery conducted by one right handed 1st operator from April 2013 to July 2013. We assessed frequencies and sites of perforation in 152 gloves; 95 used in lower extremity fracture surgery and 57 used in HJR surgery. We studied the perforation rates and sites according to participants and operation types. Using the Biogel indicator system glove, which is well known as a fast indicator of glove perforation, we were also able to assess the time difference between operative participant detection of perforation and inspector nurse detection while observing in the operative field. RESULTS: There were 18 of 30 cases in lower extremity fracture surgeries and 12 of 18 cases in HJR surgeries which had more than one surgical glove perforation event. Of all 152 gloves used, perforation occurred in 15 of 57 gloves (26.3%) in HJR surgery and 23 of 95 gloves (24.2%) in lower extremity fracture surgery. Perforation occurred more frequently in operators than assistant doctors or scrub nurses. The most frequent perforation site was the second digit of the left hand. On average, the time difference between operative participant notice of perforation and inspector nurse notice of perforation was 20.6 seconds. CONCLUSION: The perforation of surgical gloves happened in approximately one out of every four persons. Importantly, we noted a 37.0% prevalence of glove perforation in 1st operators. Considering that glove perforation is a critical factor responsible for intra-operative infection, surgeons must be conscious of the risk of surgical glove perforation and use double gloving regularly. Furthermore, indicator double gloving is recommended for fast detection of outer glove perforation.
