Frequency of Undetected Glove Perforation and Associated Risk Factors in Equine Surgery

Abstract

There is a high occurrence of undetected glove perforation in equine surgery. Precautions can be suggested based on this study although further investigation is required to assess whether glove perforations are associated with surgical site infections.

Observational study on the occurrence of surgical glove perforation and associated risk factors in large animal surgery

“…The gloves of the primary surgeon may experience more stress, caused by increased tissue and instrument handling, than the gloves of other team members, which is also supported by the significant interaction term of the primary surgeon and invasive procedures. In studies aiming to identify risk factors for glove perforation, surgical duration has been positively associated with glove perforation and our results are consistent with these findings indicating that odds of glove perforation more than double when a glove is worn longer than 60 minutes. The authors could not find evidence associating the risk of SSI with longer duration of glove wear.…”

“…Minimally invasive procedures are associated with a lower risk of glove perforation than more invasive procedures, which is consistent with studies in human and small animal surgery . This finding is also supported by evidence in large animal surgery and may reflect increased tissue and instrument handling in these procedures. The association between invasive procedures and high rates of glove perforation in this study may be attributed to the requirement to work in deep body cavities with reduced visualization.…”

“…The incidence of glove perforation detected in our study was high, affecting 66% of large animal surgeries and 17.9% of gloves tested. These rates are comparable with high‐risk procedures in human and in small animal surgery . The only other study that focused on large animal surgery reported glove perforation in 27% of glove pairs, which would translate to 13.5% of gloves being perforated if we assume that no perforation occurred in both gloves of a pair at the same time .…”

“…These rates are comparable with high‐risk procedures in human and in small animal surgery . The only other study that focused on large animal surgery reported glove perforation in 27% of glove pairs, which would translate to 13.5% of gloves being perforated if we assume that no perforation occurred in both gloves of a pair at the same time . This study used WLT to identify perforations, which may underestimate the presence of perforation compared with the more sensitive ECT .…”

Prevention and surveillance of surgical infections: A review

“…In cattle, SSI risk has also been shown to increase with increasing wound contamination (with the lowest incidence associated with clean and the highest reported for dirty wounds) . In addition, the odds of a glove perforation have been shown to increase with surgical time as well as with the invasiveness of the procedure . Although glove perforations tend to occur more commonly in the nondominant hand, there appears to be no difference with regard to surgeon experience (board‐certified vs resident) …”