Surgical Glove Perforation in Dermatologic Surgery

Abstract

Twenty-eight of 240 (11.7%) pairs of sterile surgical gloves collected from dermatologic surgery clinics had perforations. Only 17.1% of these perforations were known to the wearer at the time of surgery. Equal numbers of perforations were found in gloves of operators and assistants. Perforations were more numerous in dominant-handed gloves. Dermatologic surgeons should consider the incidence of unknown glove perforation when planning surgeries in patients with infectious diseases.

Perforation Rates for Nonsterile Examination Gloves in Routine Dermatologic Procedures

“…Perforation rates in ophthalmologic procedures varied from 0.3% to 16%, whereas perforation rates in cardiac and general surgery ranged from 24% to 31.5% 7,8 . A previous glove study of dermatologic simple excisions and Mohs micrographic surgical procedures demonstrated perforation rates of 11.7% for sterile gloves 9 . Our study further confirms that routine dermatologic procedures can be performed safely using nonsterile examination gloves without endangering the patient or the health care provider.…”

Safety Precautions in Mohs Micrographic Surgery for Patients with Known Blood-Borne Infections: A Survey-Based Study

“…[7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14] As a result, wearing double sets of gloves has been advocated during dermatologic surgery. [7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14] As a result, wearing double sets of gloves has been advocated during dermatologic surgery.…”

Infectious occupational exposures in dermatology–A review of risks and prevention measures

“…47 Two studies in the dermatologic surgery setting also showed that there is a 5.5% to 11.5% likelihood of single-or outerglove perforation during dermatologic operations, the majority of which are unrecognized by the dermatologist. 45,48,49 With double gloving, the risk of inner-glove perforation is reduced to 3.8%, and innerand outer-glove perforations seldom matched. 45 Thus, the evidence is strong that double gloving significantly reduces the risk of percutaneous exposures to blood, and the slight adjustment necessary to maintain dexterity is well worth the benefits.…”