Double gloving protecting surgeons from blood contamination in the operating room.
7 CM Avery, J Taylor, P A Johnson Double gloving and a system for identifying glove perforation in maxillofacial trauma surgery Br J oral and max surg 1999.
The rate of glove perforations in orthopaedic procedures: Single versus double gloving. A prospective study.
Glove punctures in major and minor orthopaedic surgery with double gloving. Acta Orthop Belg.
Use of double gloving to reduce surgical personnel's risk of exposure to bloodborne pathogens: An integrative review.
Studies have shown that wearing two pairs of surgical gloves can reduce the frequency of glove perforation and the rate of glove contamination significantly [23, 24] implicating that the results from the present study may have been better if double gloving was used.
However, the use of single gloving technique could have caused slightly earlier perforation than found in literature.
Intact surgical gloves will prevent this transmission, but breaches in gloving material may expose the operating room staff to risk of infections, particularly if there are cuts or abrasions on the individual's skin.
To reduce the risk of cross infection during surgery, surgical members are required to perform a regime of scrubbing and sterile gowning; gloving is an imperative part of this process.
Nine percent (413/4,381) of single gloves were perforated compared with 11% (457/4,150) of outer gloves in the double gloving group.
Five trials compared the number of perforations detected by glove wearers during surgery in standard double gloving versus indicator systems (Duron 1996, Nicolai 1997, Avery 1999a, Laine 2001, Laine 2004a).
Despite the literature and recommendations, some clinicians still resist double gloving
, Cross says.