powdered latex gloves
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

11
(FIVE YEARS 2)

H-INDEX

4
(FIVE YEARS 0)

Author(s):  
Mayra Gonçalves Menegueti ◽  
Fernando Bellissimo-Rodrigues ◽  
Marcia A. Ciol ◽  
Maria Auxiliadora-Martins ◽  
Anibal Basile-Filho ◽  
...  

Abstract Background/objective After wearing powdered gloves, healthcare workers (HCW) are supposed to wash their hands instead of using alcohol-based hand-rub (ABHR). Washing hands takes longer than using ABHR, and the use of powdered gloves may be an obstacle to hand-hygiene compliance. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of replacing powdered gloves with powder-free gloves on hand-hygiene compliance among HCW of an intensive care unit (ICU). Methods A quasi-experimental study was conducted in a general ICU of a tertiary care university hospital in Brazil. From June 1st to July 15th, 2017, all HCW were provided with powdered latex gloves only for all clinical procedures. From July 15th to August 31st, 2017, HCW were provided with nitrile powder-free gloves only. Hand-hygiene compliance was assessed through direct observation, and evaluated according to the World Health Organization Hand Hygiene guidelines. We calculated that a sample size of 544 hand hygiene opportunities needed to be observed per period. Data analysis were performed using the STATA SE® version 14, and we compared the individual’s percentage of compliance using the t test for paired data before and after the intervention. Results Overall, 40 HCW were assessed before and after the introduction of nitrile powder-free gloves, with 1114 and 1139 observations of hand hygiene opportunities, respectively. The proportion of compliance with hand hygiene was 55% (95% confidence interval [CI] 51–59%) using powdered latex gloves and 60% (95% CI 57–63%) using powder-free gloves. The difference in proportions between the two types of gloves was 5.1% (95% CI 2.5–7.6%, p < 0.001). Conclusion Our data indicate that replacing powdered gloves with powder-free gloves positively influenced hand-hygiene compliance by HCW in an ICU setting.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mayra Gonçalves Menegueti ◽  
Fernando Bellissimo-Rodrigues ◽  
Marcia A. Ciol ◽  
Maria Auxiliadora-Martins ◽  
Anibal Basile-Filho ◽  
...  

Abstract Background/Objective. After wearing powdered gloves, healthcare workers (HCW) are supposed to wash their hands instead of using alcohol-based hand-rub (ABHR). Washing hands takes longer than using ABHR, and the use of powdered gloves may be an obstacle to hand-hygiene compliance. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of replacing powdered gloves with powder-free gloves on hand-hygiene compliance among HCW of an intensive care unit (ICU). Methods. A quasi-experimental study was conducted in a general ICU of a tertiary care university hospital in Brazil. From June 1st to July 15th, 2017, all HCW were provided with powdered latex gloves only for all clinical procedures. From July 15th to August 31st, 2017, HCW were provided with nitrile powder-free gloves only. Hand-hygiene compliance was assessed through direct observation, and evaluated according to the World Health Organization (WHO) Hand Hygiene guidelines. We calculated that a sample size of 544 hand hygiene opportunities needed to be observed per period. Data analysis were performed using the STATA SE® version 14, and we compared the individual’s percentage of compliance using the t test for paired data before and after the intervention.Results. Overall, 40 HCW were assessed before and after the introduction of nitrile powder-free gloves, with 1114 and 1139 observations of hand hygiene opportunities, respectively. The proportion of compliance with hand hygiene was 55% (95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 51-59%) using powdered latex gloves and 60% (95% CI: 57-63%) using powder-free gloves. The difference in proportions between the two types of gloves was 5.1% (95% CI: 2.5-7.6%, p<0.001).Conclusion. Our data indicate that replacing powdered gloves with powder-free gloves positively influenced hand-hygiene compliance by HCW in an ICU setting.


Dermatitis ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 99-100
Author(s):  
Christen Mowad ◽  
Patricia Malerich ◽  
Paul Sutton

2004 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 339-341 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian Sanders ◽  
Adam Pollock ◽  
James Weddell ◽  
Keith Moore

Over the past twenty years infection control protocol has evolved and use of gloves is now mandatory. Practitioners have become aware of potential interactions between the latex gloves and many of the dental material used as well as the potential for contamination from the gloves. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the shear bond strength of bonded restorations to enamel of uncontaminated and contaminated resin adhesive with powder free and powdered latex gloves. The results of the study demonstrated that the resin bonding agent that was in contact with either powdered or non- powdered latex gloves did not have a significant effect on the shear bond strength of the bonded restoration.


2000 ◽  
Vol 79 (7) ◽  
pp. 610-611
Author(s):  
GUSTAVO MALINGER ◽  
SHIMON GINATH ◽  
LILIANA ZEIDEL ◽  
ILANA AVINOACH ◽  
RAMA KATZ ◽  
...  

2000 ◽  
Vol 79 (7) ◽  
pp. 610-611 ◽  
Author(s):  
GUSTAVO MALINGER ◽  
SHIMON GINATH ◽  
LILIANA ZEIDEL ◽  
ILANA AVINOACH ◽  
RAMA KATZ ◽  
...  

1999 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 4-4
Author(s):  
Kathryn Mueller

Abstract This letter responds to “Evaluating impairment from allergic disorders” in the March/April 1999 issue of The Guides Newsletter. The AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides) does not provide clear direction about whether allergies themselves constitute impairment. Consider a worker whose symptoms of asthma subsequent to workplace exposure to toluene diioscyanate resolve when he or she is removed from the job and is no longer exposed to the chemical. Because everyday exposure to diisocyanates is not common and the patient no longer requires medication, one could conclude the patient has no impairment. In contrast, consider a patient who has developed latex allergies as a result of being a health care worker and has experienced two anaphylactic reactions at work after entering rooms where powdered latex gloves had been used and must travel with an epinephrine pen. This person would have a minimum of a Class I impairment because of the few limitations of this person's activities of daily living (ADLs) and the condition requires no or intermittent treatment. Both patients might feel they had permanent changes in their body functions that required permanent changes in their ADLs. Clinicians who make evaluations should be aware of patients’ need for medications or monitoring, the severity of the patient's reactions, and limitations on social activities (eg, need for medications and need to avoid seasonal pollens).


BDJ ◽  
1998 ◽  
Vol 185 (4) ◽  
pp. 158-159
Author(s):  
L Perrin

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document