Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “GLOVES”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 289 records · Page 16Linked to original sources
PubMed2005

Internal contamination of gloves: routes and consequences.

The effect of internal glove contamination was investigated using N-methyl pyrrolidone (NMP) as a biological marker to assess systemic absorption when wearing internally contaminated gloves, and when not wearing gloves but subjected to the same challenge contaminant. The routes by which the insides of gloves become contaminated were also investigated. The area of dermal contamination was quantified using a fluorescent tracer dye and a surface monitoring fluorimeter. The main routes of internal glove contamination were found to be self-contamination, cuff entry and failed gloves. Wearing internally contaminated gloves led to higher systemic absorption than was gained from the equivalent skin contamination when not wearing gloves. Repeat wetting of fingers with aqueous NMP, when gloves were not worn, gave higher systemic absorption than the equivalent continuous exposure, probably due to the low volatility of NMP leading to increased concentration and longer residence time on the skin.

Environmental Monitoring↗
PubMed1992

Glove use by orthodontists: results of a survey in England and Wales.

Attitudes to glove wearing during treatment of patients were tested by distribution of a questionnaire to 2000 dentists known to be practising under the National Health Service regulations in England and Wales. Of the dentists who replied, 41 specialist orthodontists, representing approximately one-sixth of all orthodontists working in the general dental services in England and Wales, were identified. Results indicate that 39 per cent of these orthodontic respondents wore gloves routinely for all patients and procedures, while 49 per cent wore gloves for some patients or procedures, with 12 per cent never wearing gloves. Reasons given by the occasional glove wearers for not wearing gloves routinely included loss of tactile sensation, perceived small risk, lack of comfort, and restriction of movement. Six per cent of those who replied had experienced skin irritation considered to be associated with glove wearing, while latex gloves were preferred by 78 per cent of respondents who wore gloves.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗
PubMed2003

Allergic contact dermatitis from bisphenol A in PVC gloves.

Bisphenol A is used as an antioxidant in polyvinyl chloride (PVC) plastics and as an inhibitor of end polymerization in PVC. Since 1998, we have investigated 4 cases of contact allergy from bisphenol A in PVC gloves. Only the case of the first patient, a packer in the food industry, has been reported in detail. A dentist and an oral hygienist apprentice had used disposable PVC gloves made by the same manufacturer, both in 1999. The dentist's PVC gloves contained 0.044% bisphenol A. In 2002, a cabin servant had used 2 brands of household-type PVC gloves. Her gloves contained 0.12% and 0.07% bisphenol A. Moreover, 2 of the patients reacted to p-tertiary butyl catechol, a polymerization inhibitor in PVC, but the connection between the allergic reaction and the PVC gloves could not be proven. In 2002, we analysed 16 brands of disposable PVC gloves for medical use, covering at least 80% of the Finnish market. We found a very small amount of bisphenol A in 1 brand, and no p-tertiary butyl catechol in any of the gloves. Nowadays, it seems that manufacturers avoid using bisphenol A in the production of disposable gloves for medical use, but bisphenol A should be remembered as a possible contact allergen in PVC products.

Adult↗
PubMed1993

Toxicity and immediate allergenicity of latex gloves.

Surgical latex gloves and a natural rubber latex (NRL) catheter were evaluated for biocompatibility by cell culture methods and Type I allergic reactions in operating room personnel using latex gloves. The prevalence of relevant immediate allergy to NRL was 5.2% when using eluates made from different latex gloves as allergens and the skin-prick test methodology. The reliability of a questionnaire in detecting the sensitized persons was limited. Weak positive skin test reactions to surgical latex glove eluates were found to be unreliable as compared with challenging with the corresponding glove. Latex gloves exhibited more toxicity in cell culture than non latex gloves, but, inversely, the toxic catheter gave weak positive skin-prick test reaction in only one sensitized person, confirming that the allergenicity and toxicity of natural rubber products do not refer to the same properties of the products. Catheters exhibiting toxicity in cell culture have earlier been found to cause significant clinical symptoms in operated patients, but in the case of surgical gloves this relationship is not clear. One glove brand with a low content of known sensitizing rubber chemicals caused clear toxicity in cell culture but was well tolerated by the hospital personnel.

Allergens↗
PubMed1998

Measurement of natural rubber latex allergen levels in medical gloves by allergen-specific IgE-ELISA inhibition, RAST inhibition, and skin prick test.

Exposure to natural rubber latex (NRL) medical gloves poses risks to patients sensitized to NRL and to users of protective gloves. Previous studies have shown that extractable allergen levels of the gloves vary widely. Since most of the available laboratory methods of NRL allergen measurement lack adequate validation, we wanted to evaluate the performance of a recently developed competitive IgE-ELISA-inhibition method in relation to the skin prick test (SPT) and RAST inhibition, as well as to extractable protein quantification and an immunochemical latex antigen assay (LEAP). Twenty samples of surgical (n = 14) and examination gloves (n = 6), covering > 90% of medical gloves marketed in Finland in 1994-5, were collected by the Finnish National Research and Development Centre for Welfare and Health, coded, extracted, and analyzed by the five methods. The IgE-ELISA inhibition correlated highly significantly with SPT (r = 0.94) and RAST inhibition (r = 0.96). Likewise, ELISA inhibition and RAST inhibition showed highly significant correlation (P = 0.96, P < 0.0001 in all three instances). Protein quantification by a modified Lowry method also correlated highly significantly with SPT (r = 0.80), RAST inhibition (r = 0.82), and ELISA inhibition (r = 0.81, P < 0.0001 in all three instances). Clearly weaker correlation, though statistically significant (r = 0.48, P = 0.03), was found between SPT and the LEAP assay. An NRL standard preparation was assigned an arbitrary content of 100,000 allergen units (AU) per ml. In relation to this standard, the NRL allergen level was considered low (< 10 AU/ml) in 11, moderate (10-100 AU/ml) in two, and high (> 100 AU/ml) in seven of the 20 glove brands analyzed. In conclusion, the results of a novel IgE-ELISA-inhibition method of measuring NRL allergen levels in medical gloves correlated highly significantly with those of SPT. The ELISA method was found to be sensitive, reproducible, technically easy, inexpensive, and suitable for the analysis of large numbers of NRL products. The results of extensive market surveys in 1994 and 1995, communicated to the medical community in Finland, appear to have had a clear effect in moving glove purchasing policies toward the use of low-allergen gloves.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1992

Efficacy of double gloving as a protection against blood exposure in dermatologic surgery.

Double gloving has been widely suggested as a means of decreasing exposure to blood and other body fluids. However, most dermatologists do not routinely follow this practice when performing surgical procedures because it reduces manual dexterity and increases costs. To determine whether double gloving should be routinely practiced in dermatologic surgery, pairs of sterile surgical gloves worn during weekly UCLA dermatologic surgery clinics were collected over a period of 3 months and examined for perforations. The procedures gloves were used for ranged from excision of benign lesions, lasting 15 minutes, to hair transplants, lasting 3 hours. Upon completion of the procedures, 8 (5.5%) of 144 pairs of single gloves, 2 (3.7%) of 54 pairs of double inner gloves, and 3 (5.5%) of 54 pairs of double outer gloves were found to have perforations. There were no instances of both the double outer and the double inner gloves having perforations when worn on the same hand. This suggests that double gloving offers a protective advantage by providing extra protection for both the surgeon and the patient during dermatologic surgery.

Blood↗
PubMed1988

Comparison of diagnostic methods in latex surgical glove contact urticaria.

Surgical rubber gloves contain allergens derived from natural rubber latex which may sensitize, causing contact urticaria and even systemic reactions. We examined 15 hospital employees allergic to latex surgical gloves, using various skin tests and RAST, to determine the most reliable diagnostic method and to investigate coexistent allergy to glove powder and rubber chemicals. Prick testing using a stock solution made from one brand of latex glove yielded positive (2+ to 4+) reactions in all 15 employees: 8 retained positive reactions at a 1/10 dilution, 1 at 1/100 and 4 at 1/1000. A prick test using rubber-tree sap (Hevea brasiliensis) was positive in 12/15 employees and a scratch-chamber test using crushed rubber-tree leaf was positive in 13/15. A latex glove use test was positive in 12/13 employees and a latex RAST detected measurable amounts of specific IgE in 8/15. No positive prick test reactions were obtained using glove powder. On patch testing, 2/15 employees showed delayed allergy to rubber chemicals but no immediate reactions were detected. The present results indicate that in addition to the use test, prick testing with a stock solution prepared from latex surgical gloves is an adequate test method for routine practice when diagnosing latex glove contact urticaria. The correlation between prick tests and whole glove use tests was good, but latex RASTs yielded some negative results.

Adult↗
PubMed2001

Sensitisation to natural rubber latex: an epidemiological study of workers exposed during tapping and glove manufacture in Thailand.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the prevalence of sensitisation to natural rubber latex in latex tappers and latex glove factory workers, and to relate this to airborne exposure to latex. METHODS: Five hundred workers employed in three latex glove factories, 314 tappers, and 144 college students (control group) were studied. The workers in the glove factories were classified into three exposure groups; high, moderate, and low. Personal exposures to natural rubber latex aeroallergens were measured by immunoassay. Symptom questionnaires and skin prick tests with latex allergens (Stallergènes 1:200 w/v) and other common environmental allergens were performed. The criterion for positivity was a wheal reaction at least 3 mm in diameter greater than that to a diluent control. RESULTS: The geometric mean (GM) concentration of latex in air was 15.4 microg/m(3) for those employed in glove stripping, glove inspections, and packing of powdered gloves. The moderate exposure glove manufacturing group and the tappers had GM concentrations of 2.3 and 2.4 microg/m(3) respectively, compared with United Kingdom users of latex powdered gloves,who had GM concentrations of 0.5 microg/m(3). The prevalence of sensitisation to latex in the tappers and latex glove factory workers was 1.3% and 1.7% respectively. No positive cases were found among the college students. Workers who showed a positive skin prick test to latex were more likely to be atopic. Work related respiratory and dermatological symptoms were found in about 20% of each population studied, but were not related to the presence of positive latex prick tests. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that in the Thai latex industries, latex sensitisation is rare despite high concentrations of airborne exposure and is less prevalent than in the healthcare sector in Europe where skin exposure is greater.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

Washing of gloved hands in antiseptic solution prior to central venous line insertion reduces contamination.

Glove contamination at the time a central venous catheter is handled is highly undesirable and likely to increase the risk of subsequent line infection. This study was designed to determine how frequently gloves become contaminated during central venous line insertion and to demonstrate the value of glove decontamination immediately prior to handling of the central venous catheter During twenty routine internal jugular catheter insertions the sterility of the operator's gloved fingertips (just prior to handling the intravenous catheter) was assessed by touching the fingertips onto blood agar plates. The gloved hands were then rinsed in chlorhexidine/alcohol and after drying were placed onto a further plate. Contamination was detected in 55% of the prewash plates but in none of the postwash plates. Procedures performed by less experienced resident staff had a higher contamination rate despite there being no evident breach of sterile technique. It is likely that glove contamination results from the persistance of bacteria within the deeper layers of the skin, despite surface disinfection. These bacteria may be released by manipulation of the skin when identifying landmarks. This hypothesis was supported by a subsequent observation that gloves were more highly contaminated after firm touching of the skin rather than light touching. Glove contamination during central line insertion is frequent. Catheter contamination rates could be reduced (without risk or additional cost) by rinsing gloved hands in a solution of chlorhexidine (0.5%) in alcohol (70%) prior to handling the catheter.

Anti-Infective Agents, Local↗
PubMed2006

The use of latex gloves in the school setting.

In 1987, when the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommended the use of universal precautions in response to the HIV/AIDS epidemic, the demand for medical gloves dramatically increased. Unfortunately, the manufacturing techniques for the most widely-used gloves-natural rubber latex-also changed, in order to expedite production. These changes resulted in an increase in latex allergies, because excessive residual proteins that cause allergies remained on the gloves and became airborne with the gloves' high level of powder. This allergy concern is especially relevant in the school setting where school nurses are not only concerned about their own well-being, but the well-being of the children in their care. Today, latex gloves are still the most widely used of any medical gloves, but they have much lower levels of protein and are available in low- or no-powder. This article examines whether the current latex gloves indeed reduce the allergenicity of the gloves and how allergy and barrier protection data can assist school nurses in making informed glove choices.

Gloves, Protective↗
PubMed1996

A clinical and laboratory evaluation of three types of operating gloves for use in orthodontic practice.

This prospective study examined the durability and user acceptability of three types of operating glove for use in orthodontic practice. The glove types studied were a lightweight examination glove (Microtouch, Johnson and Johnson), a dedicated dental procedure glove (Biogel D, Regent Hospital Products) and a non-latex, nitrile glove (N-Dex, Best Manufacturing Europe N.V.). A water-leak test was used to examine 50 pairs of unused gloves of each type for manufacturing defects. Subsequently, six operators of varying experience were asked to use 20 pairs of each type of glove for fixed appliance treatment sessions and record their suitability for different clinical procedures. The used gloves were collected and tested in the laboratory for punctures. At the end of the study the six operators completed a detailed questionnaire recording their preferences for each glove type.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Disposable non-sterile gloves: a policy for appropriate usage.

Since the implementation of universal precautions, the use of disposable gloves has become part of everyday clinical practice. Guidance has been published to advise healthcare workers of the risks of latex allergies associated with the wearing of powdered latex gloves. The literature supports the use of gloves when contact with blood or body fluids is likely. However, an audit of glove usage indicated that practitioners were wearing gloves inappropriately, i.e. to wash patients (20%). The results of this study also demonstrated that a small percentage of staff (20%) were wearing vinyl gloves to deal with blood spillages and for venepuncture (13%) and cannulation (10%). A glove policy and a flow chart to assist staff in the selection of gloves were introduced. An educational programme for all hospital staff was commenced. These measures can assist healthcare workers in making an informed choice regarding glove usage.

Disposable Equipment↗
PubMed1997

The inflammatory potential of surgical glove lubricants: Biosorb, Keoflo, calcium carbonate and Hydrocote after intravitreal injection.

Surgical glove powders have been implicated in serious postoperative foreign body reactions due to contamination of the operative field. Inflammatory responses to glove lubricants or mold release agents have to date been studied to a lesser extent in ocular tissues than other body tissues, although powder contamination of intraocular lenses, with severe postoperative anterior chamber inflammatory responses, have been reported. The object of this study was to grade and quantitate the inflammatory response of surgical glove lubricants, namely Biosorb, Keoflo, calcium carbonate and Hydrocote (a hydrogel polymer film used in powderless gloves), as introduced into the posterior chamber on New Zealand white rabbits. In a double masked GLP study, a total of 150 eyes were evaluated. For each of the four test samples, a dose response curve was obtained at 10 micrograms (Keoflo only), 125 micrograms, 250 micrograms, 500 micrograms, 1000 micrograms, and 1500 micrograms. Study parameters were the quantitation of inflammatory cells in the aqueous and vitreous, and ocular irritation and inflammation, as graded by the rabbit inflammation score system, at 0 and 48 hours post-injection. A Wilcoxen signed-rank test used to evaluate statistical significance (p < 0.05). A test vitreal cell count was less that 50 cells/mm3 and the overall mean clinical response was less than 2.0. This study established that Keoflo at all concentrations 10 micrograms-1000 micrograms), and Biosorb at concentrations greater than 1000 micrograms were inflammatory. Calcium carbonate and Hydrocote were non-inflammatory at concentration of 125 micrograms-1500 micrograms. The unoperated, sham, vehicle and Ocugel controls were all non-inflammatory. The positive Zymozan A controls were defined as inflammatory. In conclusion, no glove powder is totally safe, even small amounts of glove powder (10 micrograms) can elicit an inflammatory immune response. If all glove powder averages 700mg/pair, this should be removed prior to contact with a patients tissue. Powder-free gloves and greatly reduce the potential inflammatory risk associated with powdered gloves.

Animals↗
PubMed2002

Effects of wearing knitted or rubber gloves on the transfer of Escherichia cohi between hands and meat.

On eight occasions, five volunteers each handled five pieces of meat with bare hands or while wearing dry or wet knitted gloves or rubber gloves after hands had been inoculated with Escherichia coli or after handling a piece of meat inoculated with E. coli. On each occasion, after all meat was handled, each piece of meat, glove, and hand were sampled to recover E. coli. When hands were inoculated, E. coli was recovered from all meat handled with bare hands, in lesser numbers from some pieces handled with knitted gloves, and from only one piece handled with rubber gloves. When pieces of inoculated meat were handled, the numbers of E. coli transferred to uninoculated meat from bare hands or rubber gloves decreased substantially with each successive piece of uninoculated meat, but decreases were small with knitted gloves. The findings indicate that, compared with bare hands, the use of knitted gloves could reduce the transfer of bacteria from hands to meat but could increase the transfer of bacteria between meat pieces, whereas the use of rubber gloves could largely prevent the first and greatly reduce the second type of bacteria transfer.

Bacterial Adhesion↗
PubMed2005

A preliminary evaluation of the effect of glove use by food handlers in fast food restaurants.

A study was conducted to determine whether the levels of selected microorganisms differed on foods handled by gloved and bare hands at fast food restaurants. Three hundred seventy-one plain flour tortillas were purchased from fast food restaurants and analyzed for Staphylococcus aureus, Escherichia coli, Klebsiella sp., coliform bacteria, and heterotrophic plate count bacteria. Approximately 46% of the samples were handled by workers wearing gloves compared with 52% of samples with bare hand contact. Coliform bacteria were found in 9.6% of samples handled by gloved workers and 4.4% of samples handled by bare hands, although this difference was not statistically significant. The distribution of heterotrophic plate count bacteria, a general measure of hygiene, was also higher in samples handled by gloved workers in one restaurant chain. The presence of E. coli, Klebsiella sp., and S. aureus was detected in one, two, and eight samples, respectively, and there were no significant differences between samples handled by gloved or bare hands. Neither direct contact of the tortilla with the food preparation surface nor gender of the worker affected the level of any organism tested. The observed tendency of food workers to wear the same pair of gloves for extended periods and complacency might account for the apparent failure of gloves to reduce or prevent bacterial contamination. The results further suggest that glove use might be counterproductive because workers might wash their hands less frequently when gloved.

Bacteria↗
PubMed2000

Natural rubber latex aeroallergen exposure in rubber plantation workers and glove manufacturers in Thailand and health care workers in a UK hospital.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate personal airborne natural rubber latex (NRL) concentrations for three occupational exposure groups; rubber plantation workers and NRL glove manufacturers in Thailand and health care workers in the UK. To utilise these data to classify the populations into appropriate exposure groups for the exposure-response analysis in the epidemiological study on latex allergy. METHODS: Two rubber plantations (110 workers), three NRL glove manufacturing factories (583 workers) in Thailand and one UK hospital (490 workers) were selected for the study. A preliminary workplace survey was carried out at each workplace in order to assign job titles subjectively in to high, moderate or low exposure groups for the purpose of sample selection. Between 5 and 20% of workers from each group for the three populations were then selected randomly for personal measurement of latex airborne allergens. Personal sampling was conducted using a 25 mm PTFE filter loaded in to an IOM sampling head at 2 l. min(-1). NRL aeroallergens were measured by an inhibition assay with NRL-specific IgE antibodies from NRL-sensitised people. RESULTS: A total of twenty-two personal samples were collected from plantation workers, sixty-one samples from the glove manufacturer employees and twenty seven from health care workers. The highest geometric mean (GM) NRL aeroallergen concentration was found in the glove manufacturing factories (7.3 microg m(-3)), followed by the rubber plantations (2.4 microg m(-3)) and the UK hospital (0.46 microg m(-3)). Amongst the NRL glove factories, the NRL aeroallergen concentrations were highest for those conducting the following tasks; glove stripping, glove inspections and packing of powdered gloves. The GM NRL aeroallergen for these tasks were in the range of 12.9 to 17.8 microg m(-3). CONCLUSIONS: In the process from tapping and manufacture of latex gloves through to their use the highest exposure to NRL aeroallergens is likely to occur in the manufacturing factories. Exposure to aeroallergens for the plantation workers was considered to be moderate and that of health care workers to be low.

Agriculture↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Synthetic surgical gloves.

Surgical gloves are used by healthcare workers primarily to minimize the transmission of bloodborne pathogens and other potential infectants. Gloves made of synthetic materials are getting more attention with the increasing prevalence of allergies to natural rubber latex (NRL) among patients and medical staff. However, synthetic gloves are perceived by some people as providing less protection and being less comfortable than NRL gloves. In this study, we evaluated eight models of synthetic surgical gloves from six manufacturers. We examined their barrier effectiveness (that is, their resistance to viral penetration, resistance to puncture, and strength) durability, and comfort and compared these characteristics to those of NRL gloves. We found that all the gloves offered good barrier protection, but that their level of comfort varied widely. Three gloves were rated Preferred, three were Acceptable, and the remaining two gloves were Not Recommended.

Evaluation Studies as Topic↗
PubMed2002

Synthetic surgical gloves.

Surgical gloves are used by healthcare workers to protect them against bloodborne pathogens and other potential infectants and to prevent wound contamination in patients. In response to the increasing prevalence of allergies to natural rubber latex (NRL) among patients and medical staff, the trend toward purchasing gloves made of synthetic materials is on the rise. However, latex continues to dominate the market, and some people still perceive synthetic gloves as providing less protection and being less comfortable than NRL gloves. For this Update Evaluation, we present our findings for three newly evaluated glove models from three manufacturers and summarize our findings for the seven previously evaluated models that are still on the market. (Our earlier Evaluation was published in the February-March 2000 Health Devices.) As in the previous Evaluation, our ratings are based on the gloves' barrier effectiveness--that is, their resistance to viral penetration and their durability--and comfort. We also compared these characteristics of the synthetic gloves to those of NRL gloves. We found that all the evaluated gloves offer adequate barrier protection but that their level of comfort varies considerably. We rate three models Preferred, five models Acceptable, and two models Not Recommended.

Decision Making, Organizational↗