ORIGINAL ARTICLES

Evaluation of surgical glove perforation and sharps injury in oral and maxillofacial surgery

Timothy E Osodin¹, Oladimeji A Akadiri², Victor I Akinmoladun³

¹ Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University of Abuja Teaching Hospital, Gwagwalada, Abuja, Nigeria
² Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Health Sciences, University of Port Harcourt, Port Harcourt, Rivers State, Nigeria
³ Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Medicine, University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Oyo State, Nigeria

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Timothy E Osodin
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University of Abuja Teaching Hospital, Gwagwalada, Abuja, Nigeria

Source of Support: None
Conflict of Interest: None

Introduction: The risk of exposure to infections during surgery is partly mitigated by gloving. However, perforation can reduce the effectiveness of gloving as a barrier to exposure. This study aimed at investigating the frequency of surgical glove perforation and factors predictive of these in our oral and maxillofacial surgical practice

Materials and Methods: The study was carried out at the National Hospital and the University of Abuja Teaching Hospital, Abuja, Nigeria. Consenting patients requiring oral surgical interventions were consecutively recruited into the study. Similarly, surgeons and their assistants who consented to the study were also enlisted in the study. At the end of every surgical procedure, gloves used by the surgeons and the assistants were tested for perforation. Variables investigated included the rate of perforations, the influence of the type of gloving, single versus double gloving, type of anaesthesia, and duration of surgery on rates.

Results: At a minimum of three operators per procedure, a total of 154 participants were involved in the study and 895 gloves were used. The number of glove perforations was 117(13.1%) with 82 (70.1%) involving the surgeons. There were 58/117 (49.6%) cases of perforation involving the dominant hand. Forefinger glove perforation accounted for 62 (52.9%) cases. Wire-related perforations were 72 (61.5%). Overall, nine cases of percutaneous injury were recorded. Duration of operation and double gloving were the predictive factors for perforations.

Conclusion: Risk of sharps injury was relatively high due to the high incidence of glove perforation.