From the publishers of The New England Journal of Medicine

Save time and stay informed. Our physician-editors offer you clinical perspectives on key research and news.

  1. Home>
  2. Specialties>
  3. General Medicine>
  4. Summary and Comment

GLOVE TEARS AND SHARP INJURIES IN THE OPERATING ROOM.

Concern about occupational exposure to HIV has increased interest in the epidemiology of risk in the operating room. To learn more about how exposures happen, researchers at Yale-New Haven Hospital had nurses interview operating-room personnel immediately after a possible exposure occurred.

During the three-month study period, in which there were 2292 surgical procedures, 249 personnel had visible glove tears; 92 percent of them were wearing only one pair of gloves, and no mechanism for the tear could be identified in 67 percent of instances. There were 70 sharp injuries: 67 percent by needles, 10 percent by scalpels, and 23 percent by other instruments. The researchers identified three common mechanisms of injury: in 16 percent of cases, hands were injured, while stationary and holding an instrument, by a sharp instrument passed into or out of the field. In 17 percent, hands were injured while being used to retract tissue. Several injuries were caused by sharp instruments not in use, such as needles in needle holders; the researchers believed that many of these instruments should have been removed from the surgical field.

These data suggest that many sharp injuries can be prevented by modifying standard operating-room procedures, and that glove tears might be reduced through design changes and use of double gloves.

— THL

Published in Journal Watch General Medicine October 4, 1991

Citation(s):

Wright JG et al. Mechanisms of glove tears and sharp injuries among surgical personnel. JAMA 1991 Sep 25 266 1668-1671.

Reader Remarks:

Review and add to remarks on this article

Your Remark:

Reader Remarks are intended to encourage lively discussion of clinical topics with your peers in the medical community. We ask that you keep your remarks to a reasonable length, and we reserve the right to withhold publication of remarks that do not meet this standard.

The editors of Journal Watch may respond to Reader Remarks, but we cannot promise to respond to a particular remark.

Fields marked with an * are required.

Name as you'd like it to appear:

Submitting a comment indicates you have read and agreed to the remark guidelines and declare:*

PRIVACY: We will not use your email address, submitted for a comment, for any other purpose nor sell, rent, or share your e-mail address with any third parties. Please see our Privacy Policy.

 

CLEAR erases anything you've added in any part of the form. CONTINUE allows you to check your entire post (and edit it if necessary) before submitting.

To ensure that your Reader Remark is not formatted as one long paragraph, precede new paragraphs with either a blank line or an indentation.

Search

Advanced

Sign-In

Forgot your password? Login via Athens
or your institution

New to Journal Watch?

E-mail Alerts

Delivered to your inbox.
Tailored to your interests. Free.

Sign Up Now!

Journal Watch Newsletters

Available in 13 specialties with convenient delivery and 10 free online CME exams.

Subscribe Now!

Copyright © 1991. Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.