Double gloving and a glove perforation indication system during the dental treatment of HIV-positive patients: are they necessary?
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study was to compare the incidence of glove perforation when double gloved or single gloved during the routine treatment of HIV-positive patients. In addition, a glove perforation indication system based on a double gloving technique was assessed.


METHODS
Prospective, randomised and open study of glove perforation.


METHODS
138 consecutive HIV-positive patients underwent routine dental treatment by senior dental staff and dental hygienists in a teaching hospital. Staff wore either single gloves (Regent Biogel D or standard surgical gloves) or double gloves (Regent 'Reveal' perforation indication system or standard surgical gloves). A subjective assessment of glove comfort, sensitivity and ease of donning was made using a visual analogue scale.


RESULTS
The incidence of glove perforation/procedure was low, 2.9%. There were no skin penetrating injuries, visible exposure to body fluids or unnoticed perforations. Double gloving was subjectively less comfortable and sensitive than single gloving (P < 0.0001). The glove perforation indication system did not increase the detection of intra-operative perforations.


CONCLUSIONS
There is unlikely to be any significant benefit from the use of a double gloving technique or perforation indication system during the routine dental treatment of HIV-positive patients.
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, King's College Hospital, London.
C M
CM
Avery
P
P
Gallagher
W
W
Birnbaum
D017742:Dental Care for Chronically Ill / Q000379:methods*; D004867:Equipment Design; D004868:Equipment Failure; D005932:Gloves, Surgical; D006679:HIV Seropositivity; D006801:Humans; D017758:Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional / Q000517:prevention & control*; D016602:Needlestick Injuries / Q000517:prevention & control*; D011446:Prospective Studies; D018709:Statistics, Nonparametric