Evaluating the Procedure of Double-Gloving for Protection

723 Words2 Pages

The procedure of double-gloving is often used when single-gloving is shown to be inefficient at protecting oneself and others. I, myself, have used this procedure in the laboratory while working with tuberculosis. Several studies trying to evaluate the benefits and problems of double-gloving have been conducted. These studies are very important because the safety of ourselves and others must be ensured.

One study evaluates the gloving procedure in the health care field in relation to virus transfer (Casanova, 2012). After the worldwide SARS outbreak, the CDC proposed a re-evaluation of PPE protocols to minimize patient exposure to infections. Casanova’s group states that CDC’s proposed protocol was “not empirically validated.” They suggest using model systems to develop this data. A previous study using a model system is cited and Casanova suggests alternatives to CDC’s protocol derived from the cited study. “One such alternative is double-gloving… When removing PPE, the outer pair of gloves is removed first, followed by the rest of the PPE items, and the inner pair of gloves is removed last” (Casanova, 2012). Casanova’s group used the model system to evaluate the viability of this double-gloving procedure. This study concluded that double-gloving does decrease the risk of disease transmission and suggests incorporating this into PPE procedures for health care workers.

Proper PPE use not only lowers transmission of disease, but can lower the risk of blood contact during surgery. A study has been performed to evaluate the use of double-gloving during surgery and its effect on dexterity and sensation (Fry, 2010). Fry defined sensitivity as “the ability to discriminate and interpret a stimulus applied to the fingertip” and manual dexterity as “the ability to move the fingers skillfully and to manipulate small objects with the fingers rapidly and accurately” (Fry, 2010). The Purdue Pegboard was used to evaluate the sensitivity and dexterity of volunteers using no gloves, one pair of gloves, and two pairs of gloves. Fry’s group concluded that double gloving has no significant impact on sensitivity and dexterity.

A study in Hong Kong also evaluates the use of double-gloving during surgery (Guo, 2012). This study fouses more on nurses instead of surgeons. They also focus more on glove perforation as opposed to sensitivity and dexterity. Guo states that “the purpose of our study was to assess the effectiveness of double-gloving in protecting perioperative nurses from having contact with patients’ blood and body fluids during surgery by comparing the frequency of glove perforation between single-gloving and double-gloving groups” (Guo, 2012).

Open Document