Surgical Glove Perforation in Cardiac Surgery[∗]

Background: Recently, concern for the protection of health care employees and health care recipients has led to increasing awareness of transmitted infections. Sterile surgical gloves were tested to determine the incidence of perforations after being worn during procedures commonly performed by cardiac surgeons. Material and methods: In a prospective study conducted from January 15, 2000 through February 15, 2000, 953 gloves worn during cardiac surgery were evaluated for punctures. Pairs of sterile latex surgical gloves were collected over a period of one month. Routine tasks included mainly bypass and valve surgery. Impermeability was tested by means of a water retention test according to European standard EN 455 Part 1 performed on 954 (Manufix, Hartmann, Germany) latex gloves. A control group of 50 unused gloves was also evaluated for the presence of spontaneous leakage. Gloves were separated according to whether the wearer was an operator (254 gloves), first assistant (220 gloves), second assistant (272 gloves), or theatre nurse (207 gloves). Gloves with a known perforation occurring during the procedure were not included in the study. Results: There were no punctures in the 50 unused gloves. Punctures were detected in 66 of 254 (26.0 %) gloves used by operators, 49 of 220 (22.3 %) used by first assistants, 25 of 272 (9.2 %) used by second assistants, and 78 of 207 (37.7 %) used by theatre nurses. Some gloves had more than one puncture, accounting for the 244 holes detected (operators 75/244 = 30.7 %; first assistants 54/244 = 22.1 %; second assistants 28/244 = 11.5 %; theatre nurses 87/244 = 35.7 %). Sites of scalpel and suture needle injuries were most commonly the thumb (27.3 %) and pointer finger (42.1 %) of the non-dominant hand, followed by, in descending order: middle finger (10.2 %), other fingers (15.7 %), palm (3.8 %) and back of the hand (0.9 %). Conclusion: The number of punctures that occur during cardiac operations is obviously higher than has so far been assumed. Therefore, cardiac surgeons should consider the incidence of unknown glove perforations when planning surgery in patients with infectious diseases.

Surgery - Hand protection - Infection prevention - Glove puncture

References

• 1 Macintyre I M, Currie J S. Avoiding exposure to HIV and hepatitis.  BMJ. 1993;  306 335
• 2 Naver L P, Gottrup F. Incidence of glove perforations in gastrointestinal surgery and the protective effect of double gloves: a prospective, randomised controlled study.  Euro J Surg. 2000;  166 293-295
• 3 Palmer J D, Rickett J W. The mechanisms and risks of surgical glove perforation.  J Hosp Infect. 1992;  22 279-286
• 4 Godin M S, Carlos J L, Harris J P. Occult surgical glove perforations in Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery.  Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1991;  117 910-913
• 5 Gross D J, Jamison Y, Martin K, Fields M, Dinehart S M. Surgical glove perforation in dermatologic surgery.  J Dermatol Surg Oncol. 1989;  15 1226-1228
• 6 Chapman S, Duff P. Frequency of glove perforations and subsequent blood contact in association with selected obstetric surgical procedures.  Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1992;  168 1354-1357
• 7 Mingoli A, Sapienza P, Sgarzini G, Luciani G, De Angelis G, Modini C. et al . Influence of blunt needles on surgical glove perforation and safety for the surgeon.  Am J Surg. 1996;  172 512-517
• 8 Haiduven D, Allo M. Evaluation of a one-handed surgical suturing device to reduce intraoperative needlestick injuries and glove perforations.  Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1994;  15 344
• 9 Matta H, Thompson A M, Rainey J B. Does wearing two pairs of gloves protect operating theatre staff from skin contamination?.  BMJ. 1988;  297 597-598
• 10 Webb J M, Pentlow B D. Double gloving and surgical technique.  Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 1993;  75 291-292
• 11 Dobbs R D, Barker S G, Morgan S H, Donaldson D R, Thomas M H. Self protection in surgery; the use of double gloves; Br J Surg 1990; 77 : 219 - 220. 
• 12 Albin M S, Bunegin L, Duke E S, Ritter R R, Page C P. Anatomy of a defective barrier: sequential glove leak detection in a surgical and detal environment.  Crit Care Med. 1992;  20 170-184
• 13 Gerberding J L, Littell C, Takington A, Brown A, Schecter W P. Risk of exposure of surgical personnel to patients blood during surgery at San Franc General Hospital.  N Engl J Med. 1990;  322 1788-1793
• 14 Touchette J, Giachino A. A study of glove tears in an orthopaedic OR.  Can Oper Room Nurse J. 1990;  8 24-26
• 15 Cohn G M, Seifer D B. Blood exposure in single versus double gloving during pelvic surgery.  Am J Obstet Gynec. 1990;  162 715-717
• 16 Wigmore S J, Rainey J B. Use of coloured undergloves to detect glove puncture.  Br J Surg. 1994;  81 1480

1 Presented at the 30th Annual Meeting of the German Society for Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, February 18-21, 2001, Leipzig, Germany