Comparing the level of dexterity offered by latex and nitrile SafeSkin gloves

被引:49
作者
Sawyer, J [1 ]
Bennett, A [1 ]
机构
[1] Hlth Protect Agcy Ctr Emergency Preparedness & Re, Dept Biosafety, Salisbury SP4 0JG, Wilts, England
关键词
biosafety; dexterity; latex gloves; manual dexterity; nitrile gloves;
D O I
10.1093/annhyg/mei066
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
An increase in the occurrence of latex allergy has been concurrent with the increasing use of latex gloves by laboratory and healthcare workers. In recent years nitrile gloves have been used to replace latex gloves to prevent latex allergy. Nitrile gloves offer a comparable level of protection against chemical and biological agents and are more puncture resistant. However, if manual dexterity is compromised by nitrile gloves to a greater degree than latex then this may increase the risk of sharps injuries. The Purdue pegboard test, which measures both gross and fine finger dexterity, was used to test the dexterity levels of two glove types used at HPA CEPR; Kimberly-Clark SafeSkin nitrile and latex laboratory gloves. There was a statistically significant 8.6% increase in fine finger dexterity provided by latex compared with nitrile SafeSkin laboratory gloves but no difference in gross dexterity between the glove types. There was no significant relationship between glove dexterity and age or gender. The selection of glove size was influenced by the digit length of participants. Moreover, those with longer, thinner fingers appeared to have an advantage when using nitrile SafeSkin gloves. The level of dexterity provided by latex and nitrile SafeSkin gloves for tasks on a gross dexterity level are comparable and health workers will benefit from the non-allergenic properties of nitrile. For tasks requiring fine finger dexterity nitrile SafeSkin gloves may impede dexterity. Despite this, the degree of restriction appears to have a negligible impact on safety in this study when compared with the risk of latex sensitization and subsequent allergy. In addition to glove material, working practices must also take into account glove size, fit, grip and thickness, as these factors can all influence dexterity.
引用
收藏
页码:289 / 296
页数:8
相关论文
共 22 条
[1]   Primary prevention of natural rubber latex allergy in the German health care system through education and intervention [J].
Allmers, H ;
Schmengler, J ;
Skudlik, C .
JOURNAL OF ALLERGY AND CLINICAL IMMUNOLOGY, 2002, 110 (02) :318-323
[2]   THE EFFECTS OF VARIOUS THICKNESSES OF CHEMICAL PROTECTIVE GLOVES ON MANUAL DEXTERITY [J].
BENSEL, CK .
ERGONOMICS, 1993, 36 (06) :687-696
[3]  
Edlich Richard F, 2003, J Long Term Eff Med Implants, V13, P11, DOI 10.1615/JLongTermEffMedImplants.v13.i1.20
[4]   Biomechanical performance of powder-free examination gloves [J].
Fisher, MD ;
Reddy, VR ;
Williams, FM ;
Lin, KY ;
Thacker, JG ;
Edlich, RF .
JOURNAL OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 1999, 17 (06) :1011-1018
[5]  
FLEISCHMAN E, 1954, PERS PSYCHOL, P715
[6]  
Haward BM, 2002, INT ARCH OCC ENV HEA, V75, P111
[7]   Management of occupational allergy to natural rubber latex in a medical center: The importance of quantitative latex allergen measurement and objective follow-up [J].
Hunt, LW ;
Kelkar, P ;
Reed, CE ;
Yunginger, JW .
JOURNAL OF ALLERGY AND CLINICAL IMMUNOLOGY, 2002, 110 (02) :S96-S106
[8]  
Jackson EM, 1999, J BIOMED MATER RES, V48, P572, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1097-4636(1999)48:4<572::AID-JBM25>3.0.CO
[9]  
2-H
[10]   Assessment of the durability of medical examination gloves [J].
Kerr, LN ;
Chaput, MP ;
Cash, LD ;
O'Malley, LG ;
Sarhrani, EM ;
Teixeira, JC ;
Boivin, WS ;
Mailhot, SA .
JOURNAL OF OCCUPATIONAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL HYGIENE, 2004, 1 (09) :607-612