Giordano Vincenzo, Koch Hilton Augusto, de Sousa Prado Juliano, de Morais Leonardo Schiavo, de Araújo Hara Rafael, de Souza Felipe Serrão, do Amaral Ney Pecegueiro
Serviço de Ortopedia e Traumatologia Prof. Nova Monteiro, Hospital Municipal Miguel Couto, R. Carlos Góis 375/203 Leblon, 22440-040 Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.
Departamento de Radiologia, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Rio de Janeiro 21941-590, RJ, Brazil.
Patient Saf Surg. 2014 Jun 17;8:26. doi: 10.1186/1754-9493-8-26. eCollection 2014.
The issue of safety in the surgical procedure has recently been widely and openly discussed at the World Health Organization. The use of latex gloves is the current standard of protection during surgery, as they remain intact throughout the procedure. The present study was designed to evaluate the rate of glove perforation during a two-hand technique using polyester sutures in a controlled experimental study.
Hypothesis was that the gloves used during a two-hand technique using polyester suture suffer punctures. We used 150 pairs of gloves during the experiment. Each investigator performed 30 tests always using double gloving. They made five surgical knots on each test over a custom-made table specifically developed for the experiment. Ten tests were done at a time with a week- interval. The Control Group (CG) has 30 pairs of intact surgical gloves. The gloves were tested to impermeability by water filling and leaking was observed at three different times. Statistics relating to the perforation rate were analyzed using the chi-square test. A P value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
During the experiment there was no loss of gloves by drilling or inadvertent error in performing the impermeability test. No perforations were detected at any time during the impermeability test with the gloves used for sutures. Also, the CG presented no leakage of the liquid used for the test. There was no statistical difference between the groups underwent suture nor between them and the GC.
Under the studied conditions, the authors' hypotheses could not be proved. There was no damage to the surgical gloves during the entire experiment. The authors believe that the skin abrasions observed in the ulnar side of the little finger, constant throughout the experiment, must be caused by friction. We feel there is no risk of perforation of surgical gloves during a two-hand technique using polyester suture.
手术过程中的安全问题最近在世界卫生组织得到了广泛而公开的讨论。使用乳胶手套是目前手术中的标准防护措施,因为它们在整个手术过程中保持完好无损。本研究旨在通过一项对照实验研究,评估在使用聚酯缝线的双手技术过程中手套穿孔的发生率。
假设是在使用聚酯缝线的双手技术过程中使用的手套会被刺破。实验中我们使用了150副手套。每位研究者始终使用双层手套进行30次测试。他们在专门为实验开发的定制桌子上,每次测试打五个手术结。每次进行十次测试,间隔一周。对照组(CG)有30副完好的手术手套。通过注水测试手套的不透水性,并在三个不同时间观察是否有渗漏。使用卡方检验分析与穿孔率相关的统计数据。P值小于0.05被认为具有统计学意义。
实验过程中,没有因穿刺或在进行不透水性测试时的意外失误而导致手套丢失。在使用缝线的手套进行不透水性测试的任何时候都未检测到穿孔。此外,对照组的测试液体也没有渗漏。进行缝线操作的组之间以及它们与对照组之间没有统计学差异。
在研究条件下,作者的假设无法得到证实。在整个实验过程中手术手套没有损坏。作者认为,在整个实验过程中,在小指尺侧观察到的皮肤擦伤一定是由摩擦引起的。我们认为在使用聚酯缝线的双手技术过程中,手术手套不存在穿孔风险。