Cargando…

Antibacterial activity of a sterile antimicrobial polyisoprene surgical glove against transient flora following a 2-hours simulated use

BACKGROUND: A surgical glove will protect surgeons and patients only if the glove’s integrity remains intact. However, several studies have demonstrated that undetected micro-perforations of surgical gloves are common. Because of the possibility of surgical glove puncture, an antimicrobial surgical...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Leitgeb, Johannes, Schuster, Rupert, Yee, Bit New, Chee, Pui Fong, Harnoss, Julian-Camill, Starzengruber, Peter, Schäffer, Michael, Assadian, Ojan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4490737/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26141495
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12893-015-0058-5
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: A surgical glove will protect surgeons and patients only if the glove’s integrity remains intact. However, several studies have demonstrated that undetected micro-perforations of surgical gloves are common. Because of the possibility of surgical glove puncture, an antimicrobial surgical glove was developed. The aim of this laboratory based experimental study was to assess the antibacterial efficacy of the interior chlorhexidine-gluconate (CHG)-coat of an antimicrobial synthetic polyisoprene surgical glove by using a standardized microbiological challenge. METHODS: Sixteen healthy adult participants donned one antimicrobial surgical glove and one non-antimicrobial surgical glove randomly allocated to their dominant and non-dominant hand following a crossover design. During a 2-h wear time, participants performed standardized finger and hand movements. Thereafter, the interior surface of excised fingers of the removed gloves was challenged with 8.00 log(10) cfu/mL S. aureus (ATCC 6538) or K. pneumoniae (ATCC 4352), respectively. The main outcome measure was the viable mean log(10) cfu counts of the two glove groups after 5 min contact with the interior glove’s surface. RESULTS: When comparing an antimicrobial glove against an untreated reference glove after 2-h simulated use wear-time, a mean reduction factor of 6.24 log(10) (S. aureus) and 6.22 log(10) (K. pneumoniae) was achieved after 5 min contact. CONCLUSION: These results demonstrate that wearing antibacterial gloves on hands does not negatively impact their antibacterial activity after 2-h of wear. This may have a potential benefit for patient safety in case of glove puncture during surgical procedures.