Surgical Glove Perforation and Percutaneous Injury during Intermaxillary Fixation with 0.5 Mm Stainless Steel Wire.

INTRODUCTION

The risk of exposure of either the patient or the surgeon to pathogens when the surgical glove is perforated is significant. This is particularly so in jaw fractures when intermaxillary fixation is done with the stainless-steel wire as many perforations also result in percutaneous injury.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

This study was carried out in two tertiary Hospitals in Abuja, Nigeria. Adult patients for intermaxillary fixation as a result of jaw fractures were consecutively recruited into the study. Similarly, surgeons and their trainees (assistants) were also recruited. Factors investigated included the method of gloving used by surgeons and trainees (single versus double gloving), glove perforations and percutaneous injury rates, years of operator's experience, among others. During surgical operations, percutaneous injuries were recorded and obviously perforated or torn gloves were labelled and changed. At the end of every surgical procedure, gloves used were investigated for perforation.

RESULTS

A total of 564 gloves were investigated (Surgeons-337; Trainees-227) after use for wire intermaxillary fixation procedures. The frequency of glove perforations for the surgeons was 72 (21.4%). Forefinger perforations were most frequent; 40 (55.6%) cases. Assistants, had 35 (15.4%) cases of glove perforations. Percutaneous injury occurred in 9.7% (7/72) and 5.7% (2/35 cases) of cases for surgeons and assistants, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The study revealed high risk for wire-based IMF procedures. Single gloving was more frequently associated with percutaneous injuries although double gloving was more associated with perforations with higher surgeon infection risk. Double gloving reduces the risk of percutaneous injuries and, therefore, the likelihood of exposure to blood-borne pathogens.