Tidsskrift for den Norske laegeforening : tidsskrift for praktisk medicin, ny raekke · 2017
[Sterile or non-sterile gloves in minor surgical procedures in general practice].
СтатьяОбзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Steen Knut
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Minor surgical procedures are regularly performed in general practice. The practice with regard to routine use of sterile or non-sterile gloves varies. The purpose of this article was to review the scientific basis for choice and recommendation in this area.
MATERIAL AND METHOD: A search was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane, Medline and Embase for clinical studies in English which had investigated the use of sterile or non-sterile gloves and the prevalence of wound infection related to minor surgery. This applied primarily to general practice, including accident and emergency departments, but also encompassed other fields of medicine. The reference lists for the relevant articles were also scrutinised.
RESULTS: Three randomised prospective studies from general practice were found. These showed no difference in frequency of infection. Two of the studies were of moderately good quality. A further five randomised prospective studies and four observational studies were also found, which had examined the association between the use of sterile or non-sterile gloves and infection related to minor surgery. Common to all of these was that they came from fields of medicine other than general practice, namely dermatology and odontology. No difference was found in the majority of these (six out of nine). However, the scientific quality was low or very low.
INTERPRETATION: The research data on the use of sterile or non-sterile gloves in minor surgery in general practice and the consequences for wound infection are very limited. No clear difference in infection frequency was demonstrated.
MATERIAL AND METHOD: A search was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane, Medline and Embase for clinical studies in English which had investigated the use of sterile or non-sterile gloves and the prevalence of wound infection related to minor surgery. This applied primarily to general practice, including accident and emergency departments, but also encompassed other fields of medicine. The reference lists for the relevant articles were also scrutinised.
RESULTS: Three randomised prospective studies from general practice were found. These showed no difference in frequency of infection. Two of the studies were of moderately good quality. A further five randomised prospective studies and four observational studies were also found, which had examined the association between the use of sterile or non-sterile gloves and infection related to minor surgery. Common to all of these was that they came from fields of medicine other than general practice, namely dermatology and odontology. No difference was found in the majority of these (six out of nine). However, the scientific quality was low or very low.
INTERPRETATION: The research data on the use of sterile or non-sterile gloves in minor surgery in general practice and the consequences for wound infection are very limited. No clear difference in infection frequency was demonstrated.