Skip Navigation


Annals of Occupational Hygiene Advance Access originally published online on December 15, 2005
Annals of Occupational Hygiene 2006 50(3):289-296; doi:10.1093/annhyg/mei066
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
50/3/289    most recent
mei066v2
mei066v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (2)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by SAWYER, J.
Right arrow Articles by BENNETT, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by SAWYER, J.
Right arrow Articles by BENNETT, A.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?


© 2005 British Occupational Hygiene Society Published by Oxford University Press

Original Article

Comparing the Level of Dexterity offered by Latex and Nitrile SafeSkin Gloves

JO SAWYER* and ALLAN BENNETT

Department of Biosafety, Health Protection Agency Centre for Emergency Preparedness and Response, Porton Down, Porton, Salisbury, Wiltshire SP4 0JG, UK

* Author to whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: Jo.SAWYER{at}hpa.org.uk

An increase in the occurrence of latex allergy has been concurrent with the increasing use of latex gloves by laboratory and healthcare workers. In recent years nitrile gloves have been used to replace latex gloves to prevent latex allergy. Nitrile gloves offer a comparable level of protection against chemical and biological agents and are more puncture resistant. However, if manual dexterity is compromised by nitrile gloves to a greater degree than latex then this may increase the risk of sharps injuries. The Purdue pegboard test, which measures both gross and fine finger dexterity, was used to test the dexterity levels of two glove types used at HPA CEPR; Kimberly-Clark SafeSkin nitrile and latex laboratory gloves. There was a statistically significant 8.6% increase in fine finger dexterity provided by latex compared with nitrile SafeSkin laboratory gloves but no difference in gross dexterity between the glove types. There was no significant relationship between glove dexterity and age or gender. The selection of glove size was influenced by the digit length of participants. Moreover, those with longer, thinner fingers appeared to have an advantage when using nitrile SafeSkin gloves. The level of dexterity provided by latex and nitrile SafeSkin gloves for tasks on a gross dexterity level are comparable and health workers will benefit from the non-allergenic properties of nitrile. For tasks requiring fine finger dexterity nitrile SafeSkin gloves may impede dexterity. Despite this, the degree of restriction appears to have a negligible impact on safety in this study when compared with the risk of latex sensitization and subsequent allergy. In addition to glove material, working practices must also take into account glove size, fit, grip and thickness, as these factors can all influence dexterity.

Keywords: biosafety • dexterity • latex gloves • manual dexterity • nitrile gloves


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 ANN OCCUP HYGHome page
C. PACKHAM
Alleged Allergenicity of Latex Gloves
Ann. Hyg., October 1, 2006; 50(7): 749 - 749.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.