Abstract
Background
Although the use of sterile gloves for minor and major surgical repairs is the current standard of care, use of non-sterile and clean gloves has been shown to be safe in certain procedures. In this study, we compared the infection rates of contaminated lacerations repaired with sterile versus non-sterile gloves.
Materials and methods
A prospective, randomised, two-centre pilot trial included patients that attended the emergency department with any type of visible contaminated soft tissue lacerations. The patients were selected according to convenience sampling technique and divided into two groups using random number table. Age, sex, and characteristics of the wound were assessed by a physician. According to that, the physician used sterile gloves or non-sterile, clean gloves for wound repair. Clinical data were analysed by chi-square test and paired-t test where appropriate. A p value =/< 0.05 was considered as statistically significant.
Results
Two hundred and twenty two recruited subjects with visible contaminated simple wounds were randomised to 2 groups. Males constituted 89.2% of the patients. The sites of lacerations were extremities in 50.5% of patients, head or neck in 48.4% of patients, and trunk in 1.1% of patients. Overall infection rate was 3.2%. The infection rates in the sterile gloves group and the clean gloves group were 2.02% and 4.6%, respectively (relative risk=2; odds ratio=2.3). Incidence of infection was not significantly different between two groups (p=0.322).
Conclusion
It seems that uses of clean gloves rather than sterile gloves do not increase the risk of infection in the repair of contaminated simple wounds in emergency department setting. (Hong Kong j. emerg.med. 2014;21:148-152)