Ann. occup. Hyg., Vol. 47, No. 4, pp. 313-323, 2003
© 2003 British Occupational Hygiene Society
Published by Oxford University Press
The Permeability of Surgical Gloves to Seven Chemicals Commonly Used in Hospitals

Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, Department of Industrial Hygiene and Toxicology, Topeliuksenkatu 41 a A, FIN-00250 Helsinki, Finland
Received 1 July 2002; in final form 17 December 2002
Disinfectants may cause adverse effects directly on the skin or systemically by permeating through the skin. In this study breakthrough times were measured for surgical gloves with chemicals which are commonly used in healthcare. Classical methods of analytical chemistry were tailored for the permeation tests, which were carried out according to the European standard EN 374 and the American standard ASTM F739. An exception to the EN 374 standard was made by using a 4 h testing time instead of 8 h. The gloves did not exhibit permeation of potassium hydroxide (45%), sodium hypochlorite (13%) or hydrogen peroxide (30%). Furthermore, neither glutaraldehyde (2%) nor chlorhexidine digluconate (4%) in the commercial disinfectant solutions studied exhibited permeation. Slight permeation of peracetic acid (0.35%) and acetic acid (4%) from a disinfectant agent was observed through single layered natural rubber materials. Clear evidence of formaldehyde permeation was detected through single layered natural rubber gloves, where the ASTM breakthrough times were 1767 min, but the permeation rates were not high enough for breakthrough to have occurred according to the EN standard. The gloves in this study which offered most protection from chemical permeation were the chloroprene gloves and the thick double layered natural rubber gloves.
Keywords: chemicals; disinfectants; gloves; permeation; surgical
![]()
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
E. A. MAKELA, S. VAINIOTALO, and K. PELTONEN Permeation of 70% Isopropyl Alcohol Through Surgical Gloves: Comparison of the Standard Methods ASTM F739 and EN 374 Ann. Hyg., June 1, 2003; 47(4): 305 - 312. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
