GAMMEX® powder-free Gloves with AMT Antimicrobial Technology

Powder-free
pathogens are proven to transfer from healthcare workers to patients
and from patients to healthcare workers. 1,4
direct bacterial traNsmissioN
from the patient
in a majority of gloves with a breach
longer surgeries increase the risk of contamination
• hand bacterial counts are significantly higher with longer surgery time 2
double gloving reduces the risk of hand contamination, but does not eliminate it 4,5
• in 18% to 48% of cases, breaches occur in both the outer and inner gloves
HEALTHCArE workErS
CAN BE EXpoSED
To HArMfuL pATHoGENS
DurING SurGErY
• bacteria pass to the healthcare worker through glove breaches resulting from normal wear 1
45,5%
no bacterial
transmission
54,5%
bacterial transmission
references: 1. Hübner N-o, Goerdt A-M, Stanislawski N, et al. Bacterial migration through punctured surgical gloves under real surgical conditions. BMC Infect Dis. 2010;10:192. 2. Eklund AM, ojajärvi
J, Laitinen k, Valtonen M, werkkala kA. Glove punctures and postoperative skin flora of hands in cardiac surgery. Ann Thorac Surg. 2002;74:149-153. 3. Misteli H, weber wp, reck S, et al. Surgical
glove perforation and the risk of surgical site infection. Arch Surg. 2009;144:553-558. 4. Harnoß J-C, partecke L-I, Heidecke C-D, Hübner N-o, kramer A, Assadian o. Concentration of bacteria passing
through puncture holes in surgical gloves. Am J Infect Control. 2010;38:154-158. 5. Thomas S, Agarwal M, Mehta G. Intraoperative glove perforation—single versus double gloving in protection against
skin contamination. postgrad Med J. 2001;77:458-460. 6. Chan kY, Singh VA, oun BH, To BH. The rate of glove perforations in orthopaedic procedures: single versus double gloving. A prospective
study. Med J Malaysia. 2006;61(suppl B):3-7. 7. rabussay D, korniewicz DM. The risks and challenges of surgical glove failure. AorN J. 1997;66:867-888.