Cochrane · systematic review · CD009573
Gloves, extra gloves or special types of gloves for preventing percutaneous exposure injuries in healthcare personnel
Mischke, C, Verbeek, JH, Saarto, A, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2014 · Cochrane Library
WorkAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
2
current version
GRADE rated
2
No studies
0
Included studies
NR
No studies 0 · 0%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 0 · 0%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 2 · 100%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Double gloves compared to single gloves for preventing percutaneous exposure injuries in healthcare personnel
Population: healthcare personnel
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Inner glove perforations Water leak test or air test Double gloves vs single gloves | Rate ratio 0.29 [0.23, 0.37] | 12 studies · 3437 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency |
Dexterity: outer glove perforations ‐ number of perforations Water leak test or air test Double gloves vs single gloves | Rate ratio 1.1 [0.93, 1.31] | 8 studies · 2817 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency |