• fracture repair
• skeleton
• geriatrics

• Humans
• Fracture Fixation, Intramedullary/adverse effects
• Fracture Fixation, Intramedullary/instrumentation
• Fracture Fixation, Intramedullary/methods
• Hip Fractures/surgery
• Gloves, Surgical
• Prospective Studies
• Surgical Wound Infection/etiology
• Surgical Wound Infection/epidemiology
• Surgical Wound Infection/prevention & control
• Male
• Female
• Bone Nails/adverse effects

• adherence hand antisepsis
• adherence hand disinfection
• alcohol-based hand rub requirements
• hand antisepsis
• hand disinfection
• hand wash
• hygienic hand antisepsis
• hygienic hand disinfection
• liability
• listing alcohol-based hand rubs
• skin care
• skin protection
• surgical hand antisepsis
• surgical hand disinfection
• wash lotion requirements

• Abdominal post-operative complications
• Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales
• Carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella
• Multidrug resistance
• Post-surgical infections
• Surgical site infections

The aim of this study was to characterize the risk of glove perforation among surgical team members performing a typical set of trauma procedures, as well as to identify the rate at which these people recognize potential perforations.

Gloves used in orthopedic trauma room procedures were collected from all participating team members over 2 weeks and were subsequently examined for perforations. Perforation rates based on glove position, type, wearer and procedure were assessed.

Perforations were found in 5.9% of gloves; 4.3% of the perforations were found in outer gloves and 1.6% in inner gloves. Among the outer gloves, 30.7% of the perforations were recognized by the wearer at the time of perforation; none of the inner glove perforations were recognized, even when they were associated with an accompanying outer glove perforation. Significantly more perforations were identified in the gloves of attending staff than in those of other team members. Attending staff experienced more perforations than other wearers, regardless of whether they were acting as the primary surgeon or as an assistant. Perforations were more common in open reduction internal fixation and amputation procedures. For open reduction internal fixation procedures, longer operative times were associated with more frequent glove perforations.

The rates of glove perforation are high in orthopedic trauma surgeries, and often these perforations are not recognized by the wearer. Attending staff are at an elevated risk of glove perforation. It is recommended that all members of the surgical team change both pairs of gloves whenever an outer glove perforation is observed.

• Colorectal Surgery/adverse effects
• Consensus
• Delphi Technique
• Digestive System Surgical Procedures
• Humans
• Surgical Wound Infection/etiology
• Surgical Wound Infection/prevention & control

• Damage
• EN 455-1
• Glove
• Lesions
• Orthopedic surgery
• Surgical side infection

• Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee
• Arthroscopy
• Equipment Failure
• Gloves, Surgical
• Humans
• Musculoskeletal System

• Universitätsmedizin Rostock (8980)

• ASTM D5151-19
• EN455
• general surgery
• microperforations
• surgical side infections

It has been reported that in conventional open surgery, approximately 10% of surgical gloves are perforated during surgery without being noticed. To protect both the patient and medical staff from harm, double gloving or changing gloves routinely at certain intervals during surgery is recommended. However, whether these protective measures are also necessary for laparoscopic colorectal surgery is unknown because the actual perforation rate during laparoscopic procedures is unclear.

Seventy-seven laparoscopic colorectal surgeries were evaluated, and a total of 616 surgical gloves used in the surgeries were collected for analysis. The presence of glove perforation was tested by the standard water-leak test method (EN455-1).

Seven perforations were detected (1.1%). The duration of the laparoscopic procedure was not a statistically significant risk factor for glove perforation (p = 0.41). Postoperative surgical site infections (SSIs) were observed in 12 cases (15.6%), but there was no significant correlation between the presence of glove perforation and SSI (p = 0.92). According to the bacterial cultivation results, the majority of causative agents of SSI were enterobacteria, which belong to the major gut flora.

Although the perforation rate was considerably lower than that in open surgery, surgical glove perforation occurred during laparoscopic procedures. Double gloving in laparoscopic colorectal surgery is recommended not to prevent SSI but to protect medical workers from harmful infections after direct contact with the patient.

• Laparoscopic colorectal surgery
• Surgical glove perforation
• Surgical site infection

• Cardiac implantable electronic device
• Complication
• Defibrillator
• Device
• Infection
• Lead
• Pacemaker

• Antisepsis
• Debridement
• Pathogen spectrum
• Preventive measures
• Wound irrigation

• manual dexterity
• perforation
• satisfaction
• scrub nurse
• surgical gloves

• Covid-19
• Risk-scoring system
• SARS-CoV-2
• personal protective equipment (PPE)

• Betacoronavirus
• COVID-19
• Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology
• Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control
• Dentistry/methods
• Dentistry/standards
• Humans
• Pandemics/prevention & control
• Personal Protective Equipment
• Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology
• Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control
• Risk Assessment/methods
• SARS-CoV-2
• Safety Management

• COVID-19
• SARS-CoV-2
• dentistry
• oral medicine
• personal protective equipment (PPE)

• Betacoronavirus
• COVID-19
• Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology
• Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control
• Cross Infection/prevention & control
• Dentistry/organization & administration
• Dentistry/standards
• Humans
• Infection Control/organization & administration
• Infection Control/standards
• Oral Medicine/organization & administration
• Pandemics/prevention & control
• Personal Protective Equipment
• Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology
• Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control
• Risk Assessment
• Risk Factors
• SARS-CoV-2

• Emergency
• Intra-abdominal infection
• Operating room
• Prevention
• Surgical site infection

• Humans
• Intraabdominal Infections/prevention & control
• Intraoperative Care
• Operating Rooms
• Practice Guidelines as Topic
• Surgical Wound Infection/prevention & control

The saphenous vein is the most commonly used conduit for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Wound healing complications related to saphenous vein harvesting are common, with reported surgical site infection rates ranging from 2 to 20%. Patients’ risk factors, perioperative hygiene routines, and surgical technique play important roles in wound complications. Here we describe the perioperative routines and surgical methods of Swedish operating theatre (OT) nurses and cardiac surgeons.

A national cross-sectional survey with descriptive design was conducted to evaluate perioperative hygiene routines and surgical methods associated with saphenous vein harvesting in CABG. A web-based questionnaire was sent to OT nurses and cardiac surgeons at all eight hospitals performing CABG surgery in Sweden.

Responses were received from all hospitals. The total response rate was 62/119 (52%) among OT nurses and 56/111 (50%) among surgeons.

Chlorhexidine 5 mg/mL in 70% ethanol was used at all eight hospitals. The OT nurses almost always (96.8%) performed the preoperative skin disinfection, usually for three to 5 minutes. Chlorhexidine was also commonly used before dressing the wound.

Conventional technique was used by 78.6% of the surgeons, “no-touch” by 30.4%, and both techniques by 9%. None of the surgeons used endoscopic vein harvesting. Type of suture and technique used for closing the wound differed markedly between the centres.

In this article we present insights into the hygiene routines and surgical methods currently used by OT nurses and cardiac surgeons in Sweden. The results indicate both similarities and differences between the centres. Local traditions might be the most important factors in determining which procedures are employed in the OT. There is a lack of evidence-based hygiene routines and surgical methods.

• antisepsis
• randomized controlled trial
• surgical site infection

• Adult
• Anti-Infective Agents, Local/administration & dosage
• Antisepsis/methods
• Bacterial Load/methods
• Chlorhexidine/administration & dosage
• Chlorhexidine/analogs & derivatives
• Cross-Over Studies
• Double-Blind Method
• Hand/microbiology
• Hand Disinfection/methods
• Humans
• Middle Aged
• Xylenes/administration & dosage

• Antimicrobial efficacy
• Antimicrobial glove
• Antiseptic
• Bacterial migration
• Bacterial skin flora
• Chlorhexidine
• Perforation
• Surgical glove
• Surgical site infection

• patient preparation
• skin disinfection
• surgical site infection

• gloving
• sterile drapes
• sterile field
• sterile technique
• surgical site infection

• Gloves, Surgical
• Hand Hygiene/methods
• Humans
• Infection Control/methods
• Infectious Disease Transmission, Professional-to-Patient/prevention & control
• Operating Rooms/standards
• Practice Guidelines as Topic
• Surgical Attire/standards
• Surgical Drapes/standards

Introduction: Surgical gloves are used to prevent contamination of the patient and the hospital staff with pathogens. The aim of this study was to examine the actual effectiveness of gloves by examining the damage (perforations, tears) to latex gloves during surgery in the case of primary hip and knee prosthesis implantation.

Materials and methods: Latex surgical gloves used by surgeons for primary hip and knee replacement surgeries were collected directly after the surgery and tested using the watertightness test according to ISO EN 455-1:2000.

Results: 540 gloves were collected from 104 surgeries. In 32.7% of surgeries at least one glove was damaged. Of all the gloves collected, 10.9% were damaged, mainly on the index finger. The size of the perforations ranged from ≤1 mm to over 5 mm. The surgeon’s glove size was the only factor that significantly influenced the occurrence of glove damage. Surgeon training level, procedure duration, and the use of bone cement had no significant influence.

Conclusions: Our results highlight the high failure rate of surgical gloves. This has acute implications for glove production, surgical practice, and hygiene guidelines. Further studies are needed to detect the surgical steps, surface structures, and instruments that pose an increased risk for glove damage.

• ISO DIN 455-1
• infection risk
• joint replacement
• latex
• orthopedic surgery
• perforations
• surgical gloves
• tears

The number of total hip arthroplasties is ever increasing. Literature about glove perforation rates in arthroplasties in India is very scarce. The purpose of our study was to determine the incidence of glove perforation and increasing the awareness of possible glove perforations to decrease the risk of infection. We performed a prospective study in which we tested gloves worn by all scrubbed personnel. A total of 1408 gloves were collected from 42 primary total hip and 13 revision total hip arthroplasties. Incidence of glove perforation was found to be more in revision total hip arthroplasty. We found a greater outer glove perforation rate of about 38.33% as compared to 25 % inner glove perforation rate. Outer glove perforation was recognized 100% of time intraoperatively but inner glove perforation was noted only 17% of time. First assistant recorded highest rate of glove perforation.

• Surgical gloves
• latex
• perforation
• primary total hip arthroplasty
• revision total arthroplasty

• Breast implants
• Infection
• Neoplasms
• Prevention & control

• Breast Implants
• Checklist
• Evidence-Based Medicine
• Female
• Humans
• Mammaplasty
• Practice Guidelines as Topic
• Surgical Wound Infection/prevention & control

• NIHR-CS-011-014 Department of Health

A surgical glove will protect surgeons and patients only if the glove’s integrity remains intact. However, several studies have demonstrated that undetected micro-perforations of surgical gloves are common. Because of the possibility of surgical glove puncture, an antimicrobial surgical glove was developed. The aim of this laboratory based experimental study was to assess the antibacterial efficacy of the interior chlorhexidine-gluconate (CHG)-coat of an antimicrobial synthetic polyisoprene surgical glove by using a standardized microbiological challenge.

Sixteen healthy adult participants donned one antimicrobial surgical glove and one non-antimicrobial surgical glove randomly allocated to their dominant and non-dominant hand following a crossover design. During a 2-h wear time, participants performed standardized finger and hand movements. Thereafter, the interior surface of excised fingers of the removed gloves was challenged with 8.00 log₁₀ cfu/mL S. aureus (ATCC 6538) or K. pneumoniae (ATCC 4352), respectively. The main outcome measure was the viable mean log₁₀ cfu counts of the two glove groups after 5 min contact with the interior glove’s surface.

When comparing an antimicrobial glove against an untreated reference glove after 2-h simulated use wear-time, a mean reduction factor of 6.24 log₁₀ (S. aureus) and 6.22 log₁₀ (K. pneumoniae) was achieved after 5 min contact.

These results demonstrate that wearing antibacterial gloves on hands does not negatively impact their antibacterial activity after 2-h of wear. This may have a potential benefit for patient safety in case of glove puncture during surgical procedures.

• Body fluids
• Cross infection
• Needlestick injuries
• Operating rooms
• Surgical gloves