Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Needlestick Injuries”

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 1,243 records · Page 69Linked to original sources

Double gloving: a risk reduction strategy.

BACKGROUND: The use of sterile surgical gloves has become the international standard of care in the perioperative environment. Yet the potential for barrier failure exists, with the subsequent potential for the transfer of pathogens to both the patient and the surgical team. The practice of double gloving (wearing two pairs of sterile surgical gloves) is often considered a mechanism for managing the potential risk of exposure during surgery. LITERATURE ON DOUBLE GLOVING: In the 2002 Cochrane review of double gloving, findings were summarized from 18 studies. The review, which covers a variety of surgical environments and addresses several double gloving options, indicates that double gloving significantly reduced perforations to the innermost glove. Other studies report a risk reduction of 70%-78% attributed to double gloving. OVERCOMING PRACTITIONER OBJECTIONS: Practitioners, in voicing objections to double gloving, cite poor fit, loss of tactile sensitivity, and increased costs. An important issue is how the two gloves work together, especially when they are powder free. Several studies have reported good acceptance of double gloving without loss of tactile sensitivity, two-point discrimination, or loss of dexterity. Although double gloving increases the glove cost per practitioner, the reduction of bloodborne pathogen exposure and possible seroconversion of practitioners represents a significant savings. Strategies that may help to facilitate the process include sharing the data on double gloving to build justification for the implementation, enlisting the support of the champions of the change at hand, and providing a glove-fitting station. SUMMARY: The stresses placed on a surgical glove today--the length of cases, heavy and/or sharp instrumentation, and chemicals used in the surgical field--make it imperative that barrier protection be ensured.

Blood-Borne Pathogens↗

Glove perforation rate in vascular surgery--a comparison between single and double gloving.

BACKGROUND: In surgery intact gloves act as a sterile barrier between surgeon and patient. The impermeable gloves protect the surgeon from bloodborne pathogens such as HIV, hepatitis B, and hepatitis C. On the other hand, the surgical wound is protected from micro-organisms from the skin of the surgeon. One objective of this study was to compare puncture rates between the double gloving color indication system and single-use gloves and the other to determine the extent to which glove perforations remain undetected during the course of vascular surgical operations. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study material comprised all gloves used in vascular surgical operations at Satakunta Central Hospital for a period of two months. The analysis was made by the glove type in a prospective and randomised manner. Gloves were tested immediately after the surgical procedure using the approved standardized water-leak method. With this method the glove is filled with water using a special filling tube, and the water-filled glove is then checked for two minutes to detect any holes. The gloves used in this study were either double gloves with indicator, or the standard glove used at our hospital. RESULTS: In 73 operations altogether 200 gloves were tested, half of them were double gloves and half were single gloves. The perforation occurred in the double gloves 3 times and with single gloves 12 times. The overall perforation rate was 15 out of 200 gloves (7.5%). The detection of perforation during surgery was 60%. Most frequently the perforation was located in the second finger of the left hand, 9 out of 15 perforations. CONCLUSION: In view of the critical importance of safety at work both transmitting the pathogens from the skin of the surgeon to the wound and transmitting the bloodborne pathogens from the patient to the surgeon, it is very important to use double gloving at least in operations where there is a high risk of glove perforation.

Blood-Borne Pathogens↗

The decay of the latent reservoir of replication-competent HIV-1 is inversely correlated with the extent of residual viral replication during prolonged anti-retroviral therapy.

Replication-competent HIV-1 can be isolated from infected patients despite prolonged plasma virus suppression by anti-retroviral treatment. Recent studies have identified resting, memory CD4+ T lymphocytes as a long-lived latent reservoir of HIV-1 (refs. 4,5). Cross-sectional analyses indicate that the reservoir is rather small, between 103 and 107 cells per patient. In individuals whose plasma viremia levels are well suppressed by anti-retroviral therapy, peripheral blood mononuclear cells containing replication-competent HIV-1 were found to decay with a mean half-life of approximately 6 months, close to the decay characteristics of memory lymphocytes in humans and monkeys. In contrast, little decay was found in a less-selective patient population. We undertook this study to address this apparent discrepancy. Using a quantitative micro-culture assay, we demonstrate here that the latent reservoir decays with a mean half-life of 6.3 months in patients who consistently maintain plasma HIV-1 RNA levels of fewer than 50 copies/ml. Slower decay rates occur in individuals who experience intermittent episodes of plasma viremia. Our findings indicate that the persistence of the latent reservoir of HIV-1 despite prolonged treatment is due not only to its slow intrinsic decay characteristics but also to the inability of current drug regimens to completely block HIV-1 replication.

Adult↗

An assessment of the incidence of punctures in latex and non-latex dental examination gloves in routine clinical practice.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the puncture resistance of a recently introduced non-latex, nitrile dental glove in comparison with a latex glove worn during routine clinical dental procedures. SETTING: Dentists in general dental practice working within the UK during 1999. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: 2,020 gloves worn by five general dental practitioners were examined for punctures following standard clinical use by a water inflation method. Procedures undertaken during glove usage and length of time worn were recorded. RESULTS: Following clinical use, 1.9% of the latex gloves and 5.3% of the nitrile gloves had punctures, a statistically significant difference (P < 0.0001). The puncture resistance of the nitrile gloves was superior to the puncture resistance of previously tested worn non-latex (vinyl) gloves. There was no evidence of a statistically significant difference between operators for the percentage or incidence of punctured gloves (P = 0.787) after correcting for glove type. No statistically significant difference was noted between incidence of puncture in the control, unused gloves (n = 200 for each type) and the gloves examined following clinical use (P = 0.907 for nitrile, P = 0.613 for latex). CONCLUSION: No increase in the number of punctures was noted following clinical use for either glove type. This could be considered to indicate good puncture resistance of the gloves tested in clinical use.

Analysis of Variance↗

Needle guard.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Dental Instruments↗

HIV awareness.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Accidents, Occupational↗