LAUSR

Objective: To assess the risk of glove perforation during common maneuvers or events in trauma-related orthopaedic surgical procedures. Methods: Four investigators executed 6 high-risk maneuvers in a simulated laboratory setting. Alternative techniques were also performed for most maneuvers. Glove integrity was examined by 2 standard methods of fluid leak testing. The rates of perforation were compared between techniques using &khgr;2 and Fisher exact tests. Results: Investigators were only able to identify 14.3% of perforations. Cleaning drill bit flutes by hand had the highest overall tear rate (85%). Catching a glove along the guide wire when passing a cannulated drill bit resulted in a 50% perforation rate. Catching a glove around a rotating drill shaft had a tear rate of 40%. Palpating the end of a flexible nail cut with a wire cutter had a significantly higher perforation rate than a nail cut with a proprietary, nail-specific tool (35% vs. 5%, P = 0.022). Blind digital fracture reduction had a tear rate that was not statistically different than directly visualizing the reduction (20% vs. 15%, P = 0.5). Inserting screws while stabilizing the threads with one's fingers resulted in a perforation rate of 15%. Conclusions: Orthopaedic surgeons should be aware that microperforation of surgical gloves often goes undetected and should consider modifying or using alternative techniques when performing certain surgical maneuvers. The results of this study can be used by orthopaedic and surgical first assist training programs to promote safe surgical practice.