Incidence and patterns of surgical glove perforations: experience from Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

Abebe Bekele, Nardos Makonnen, Lidya Tesfaye, Mulat Taye, Abebe Bekele, Nardos Makonnen, Lidya Tesfaye, Mulat Taye

Abstract

Background: Surgical glove perforation is a common event. The operating staff is not aware of the perforation until the procedure is complete, sometimes in as high as 70% of the incidences. Data from Ethiopia indicates that the surgical workforce suffers from a very surgery related accidents, however there is paucity of data regarding surgical glove perforation. The main objective is to describe the incidence and patterns of surgical glove perforation during surgical procedures and to compare the rates between emergency and elective surgeries at one of the main hospitals in Addis Ababa Ethiopia.

Methods: This is a prospective study, performed at the Minilik II referral hospital, Addis Ababa. All surgical gloves worn during all major surgical procedures (Emergency and Elective) from June 1-July 20, 2016 were collected and used for the study. Standardised visual and hydro insufflation techniques were used to test the gloves for perforations. Parameters recorded included type of procedure performed, number of perforations, localisation of perforation and the roles of the surgical team.

Results: A total of 2634 gloves were tested, 1588 from elective and 1026 from emergency procedures. The total rate of perforation in emergency procedures was 41.4%, while perforation in elective surgeries was 30.0%. A statistically significant difference (P < 0.05) was found in between emergency and elective surgeries. There were a very high rate of perforations of gloves among first surgeons 40.6% and scrub nurses 38.8% during elective procedures and among first surgeons (60.14%), and second assistants (53.0%) during emergency surgeries. Only 0.4% of inner gloves were perforated. The left hand, the left index finger and thumb were the most commonly perforated parts of the glove. Glove perforation rate was low among consultant surgeons than residents.

Conclusions: Our reported perforation rate is higher than most publications, and this shows that the surgical workforce in Ethiopia is under a clear and present threat. Measures such as double gloving seems to have effectively prevented cutaneous blood exposure and thus should become a routine for all surgical procedures. Manufacturing related defects and faults in glove quality may also be contributing factors.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Rates of glove perforation segregated according to types of Surgical procedure type

References

    1. Osman MO, Jensen SL. Surgical gloves: current problems. World J Surg. 1999;23:630–7. doi: 10.1007/PL00012360.
    1. Jamal A, Wilkinson S. The mechanical and microbiological integrity of surgical gloves. ANZ J Surg. 2003;73:140–3. doi: 10.1046/j.1445-2197.2003.02645.x.
    1. Cole RP, Gault DT. Glove perforation during plastic surgery. Br J Plast Surg. 1989;42:481–3. doi: 10.1016/0007-1226(89)90019-2.
    1. Bukhari SS, Harrison RA, Sanderson PJ. Contamination of surgeons glove fingertips during surgical operations. J Hosp Infect. 1993;24:117–21. doi: 10.1016/0195-6701(93)90073-9.
    1. Pitten FA, Herdemann G, Kramer A. The integrity of latex gloves in clinical dental practice. Infection. 2000;28(6):388–92. doi: 10.1007/s150100070011.
    1. Manjunath AP, Shepherd JH, Barton DP, Bridges JE, Ind TE Glove perforations during open surgery for gynaecological malignancies. BJOG. 2008;115(8):1015–9. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2008.01738.x.
    1. Malhotra M, Sharma JB, Wadhwa L, Arora R. Prospective study of glove perforation in obstetrical and gynecological operations: are we safe enough? J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2004;30(4):319–22. doi: 10.1111/j.1447-0756.2004.00201.x.
    1. Solda S, et al. Undetected perforations of surgical gloves during emergency procedures. Rev Assoc Med Bras. 2009;55(5):597–600. doi: 10.1590/S0104-42302009000500026.
    1. Twomey CL. Double gloving: a risk reduction strategy. Jt Comm J Qual Saf. 2003;29(7):369–78. doi: 10.1016/S1549-3741(03)29045-6.
    1. Thomas S, Agarwal M, Mehta G. Intra-operative glove perforation—single versus double gloving in protection against skin contamination. Postgrad Med J. 2001;77:458–60. doi: 10.1136/pmj.77.909.458.
    1. Bekele A, Kotisso B, Shiferaw S. Work-related operating theatre accidents among surgical residents in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. East Central Afr J Surg. 2008;13:1.
    1. Bekele A, Shiferaw S, Gulilat D. Levels and trends of occupational hazards among surgical residents at Tikur Anbessa Hospital, Addis Ababa Ethiopia. East Central Afr J Surg. 2013;18:3.
    1. Reichman DE, Greenberg JA. Reducing surgical site infections: a review. Rev Obstet Gynecol. 2009;2(4):212–21.
    1. Pieper SP, Schimmele SR, Johnson JA, Harper JL. A prospective study of the effcacy of various gloving techniques in the application of Erich arch bars. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1995;53:1174–6. doi: 10.1016/0278-2391(95)90628-2.
    1. Hussain SA, Latif ABA, Choudhary AA. Risk to surgeons: a survey of accidental injuries during operations. Br J Surg. 1988;75:314. doi: 10.1002/bjs.1800750407.
    1. Brough SJ, Hunt TM, Barrier WW. Surgical glove perforations. Br J Surg. 1988;75:317. doi: 10.1002/bjs.1800750408.
    1. Dodds RDA, Guy PJ, Peacock AM, et al. Surgical glove perforation. Br J Surg. 1988;75:966–8. doi: 10.1002/bjs.1800751009.
    1. Hamer AJ. Electronic device for the detection of breaches in asepsis during surgical procedures. BrJ Surg. 1987;74:10389. doi: 10.1002/bjs.1800741126.
    1. Fell M, Hopper W, Devlin BH, et al. Surgical glove failure rate. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 1989;71:7–10.
    1. Green SE, Gompertz RH. Glove perforation during surgery: what are the risks? Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 1992;74(5):306–8.
    1. Tanner J, Parkinson H. Double gloving to reduce surgical cross-infection. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006;3:CD003087.
    1. Naver LP, Gottrup F. Incidence of glove perforations in gastrointestinal surgery and the protective effect of double gloves: a prospective, randomized controlled study. Eur J Surg. 2000;166:293–5. doi: 10.1080/110241500750009113.
    1. Sohn RL, Murray MT, Franko A, Hwang PK, Dulchavsky SA, Grimm MJ. Detection of surgical glove integrity. Am Surg. 2000;66(3):302–6.
    1. Gani JS, Anseline PF, Bissett RL. Efficacy of double versus single gloving in protecting the operating room team. Aust NZ J Surg. 1990;60:171–5.
    1. Abebe Bekele MD, Amezene Tadesse MD. Inadequate Hepatitis B vaccination among surgeons practicing in Ethiopia: a cross sectional study. Ethiop Med J. 2014;52(3):107–12.
    1. Meakin LB, Gilman OP, Parsons KJ, Burton NJ, Langley‐Hobbs SJ. Colored indicator undergloves increase the detection of glove perforations by surgeons during small animal orthopedic surgery: a randomized controlled trial. Vet Surg. 2016;45(6):709–14. doi: 10.1111/vsu.12519.

Source: PubMed

Sponsoren und Mitarbeiter

Krankheiten

Drogeninterventionen

3
Abonnieren