Postoperative integrity of veterinary surgical gloves

Journal of the American Animal Hospital Association

Volumn 39, Issue 3, 2003, Pages 311-320

  Character, Ben J ^a   McLaughlin, Ron M ^a   Hedlund, Cheryl S ^c   Boyle, Carolyn R ^b   Elder, Steven H ^a  

^a MISSISSIPPI STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b MISSISSIPPI STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; ELECTRIC RESISTANCE; INCIDENCE; MATERIALS TESTING; MEDICAL DOCUMENTATION; MULTICENTER STUDY; OPERATION DURATION; PEROPERATIVE COMPLICATION; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; SURGEON; SURGICAL GLOVE; TEACHING HOSPITAL; TIME; VETERINARY MEDICINE;

ANIMALIA;

EID: 0038627976     PISSN: 05872871     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.5326/0390311     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Geelhoed GW. The pre-Halstedian and post-Halstedian history of the surgical rubber glove. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1988;167:350-356.
2. Edwards TB, Habetz MD, D'Ambrosia RD. The effect of polymethymethacrylate on latex-free surgical gloves. J Arthroplasty 2001;16(4):541-542.
3. Singleton LC, Connor TH. An evaluation of the permeability of chemotherapy gloves to three cancer chemotherapy drugs. Oncol Nurs Forum 1999;26(9):1491-1496.
4. Slevin ML, Ang LM, Johnston A, Turner P. The efficiency of protective gloves used in the handling of cytotoxic drugs. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 1984;12(3):151-153.
5. Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Blood-borne pathogens publication 1910.1030. Washington, DC: Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 1992.
6. Albin MS, Bunegin L, Duke ES, Ritter RR, Page CP. Anatomy of a defective barrier: sequential glove leak detection in a surgical and dental environment. Crit Care Med 1992;20(2):170-184.
7. Sohn RL, Murray MT, Franko A, Hwang PK, Dulchavsky SA, Grimm MJ. Detection of surgical glove integrity. Am Surg 2000;66:3002-3006.
8. Avery CM, Hjort A, Walsh S, Johnson PA. Glove perforation during surgical extraction of wisdom teeth. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1998;86(1):23-25.
9. Fiehn NE, Westergaard J. Physical and microbiological quality of five different examination and surgical gloves before and after use in dental practice. Zentralbl Hyg Umweltmed 1993;195(1):27-36.
10. McLeod GG. Needlestick injuries at operations for trauma. Are surgical gloves an effective barrier? J Bone Joint Surg Br 1989;71(3):489-491.
11. Matta H, Thompson AM, Rainey JB. Does wearing two pairs of gloves protect operating theatre staff from skin contamination? Br Med J 1988;3:297(6648):597-598.
12. McCue SF, Berg EW, Saunders EA. Efficacy of double-gloving as a barrier to microbial contamination during total joint arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1981;63-A(5):811-813.
13. Fell M, Hopper W, Williams J, Brennan L, Wilson C, Devlin HB. Surgical glove failure rate. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 1989;71:7-10.
14. Katz JN, Gobetti JP, Shipman C Jr. Fluorescein dye evaluation of glove integrity. J Am Dent Assoc 1989;118(3):327-331.
15. Merchant VA, Molinari JA, Pickett BS. Microbial penetration of gloves following usage in routine dental procedures. Am J Dent 1992;5(2):95-96.
16. Cox MJ, Bromberg WJ, Zura RD, Foresman PA, Morgan RG, Edlich RF. New advances in electronic devices for hole detection. J Appl Biomater 1994;5:257-264.
17. Standard test method for detection of holes in medical gloves. ASTM committee D-11 on rubber. Subcommittee D11.40 on consumer rubber products. D5151-92:1-2.
18. Agresti A. Categorical data analysis. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1990:47-48 (chi-squared test of independence), 230-235 (Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test), 394-395 (McNemar test).