Author: Wong, Po-ming Gi Gi
Title: Is double-gloving really protective? : a comparison between the glove perforation rates among perioperative nurses with single-glove and double-glove during operations
Degree: M.Sc.
Year: 2011
Subject: Hong Kong Polytechnic University -- Dissertations
Hospitals -- Staff -- Health and hygiene
Bloodborne infections -- Prevention
Department: Faculty of Health and Social Sciences
Pages: xi, 69 leaves : col. ill. ; 30 cm.
Language: English
Abstract: Background. Surgical teams rely on surgical gloves to protect themselves and their patients against bloodborne pathogenic infections as they are the only barrier between them during operations. However, glove perforation occurs frequently and so safety measures such as double-gloving are adopted by surgeons to tackle the problem. Nevertheless, double-gloving is not commonly practised by operating room nurses and there is limited study about double-gloving that targets only perioperative nurses. Therefore, the effectiveness of double-gloving and the nurses' perceptions on it should be studied before promoting double-gloving in the operating room. Aim. The aim of this research was to assess the effectiveness of double-gloving in protecting perioperative nurses from coming into contact with patients' blood and body fluids during operations by comparing the frequency of glove perforation between single-gloving and double-gloving during operations. Method. A prospective randomized study was done. Nurses were randomly assigned to single-gloved (control group) and double-gloved (experimental group) groups for comparison of the glove perforation rate. A water-leakage test and air-inflation test were used to test for glove perforation. Questionnaires were given to the participants to get their feedback on double-gloving. Result. Sixty-three nurses from the operating room of St. Teresa's Hospital participated in the study. The result in the study was consistent with other studies that perforation of the inner layer of double-glove was less than that of single-gloving. The difference in inner layer double-glove perforation and both single-glove and outer layer double-glove perforations were statistically significant (χ²=0.089, p<0.05 and χ²=0.113, p<0.01 respectively). Forty-three sets of questionnaires were collected from the participants (response rate: 68.2%). Double-gloving was not commonly practised by the participants before the study (16.3%), the most common reason for them not to double-glove was due to decreased manual dexterity when wearing an extra pair of glove. Conclusions. Based on the findings of the study, double-gloving is effective in protecting operating room nurses against bloodborne pathogen exposure. It should be introduced as a routine practice.
Rights: All rights reserved
Access: restricted access

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
b24267818.pdfFor All Users (off-campus access for PolyU Staff & Students only)744.06 kBAdobe PDFView/Open

Copyright Undertaking

As a bona fide Library user, I declare that:

  1. I will abide by the rules and legal ordinances governing copyright regarding the use of the Database.
  2. I will use the Database for the purpose of my research or private study only and not for circulation or further reproduction or any other purpose.
  3. I agree to indemnify and hold the University harmless from and against any loss, damage, cost, liability or expenses arising from copyright infringement or unauthorized usage.

By downloading any item(s) listed above, you acknowledge that you have read and understood the copyright undertaking as stated above, and agree to be bound by all of its terms.

Show full item record

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: