We are using cookies to implement functions like login, shopping cart or language selection for this website. Furthermore we use Google Analytics to create anonymized statistical reports of the usage which creates Cookies too. You will find more information in our privacy policy.
OK, I agree I do not want Google Analytics-Cookies
Quintessence International
Login:
username:

password:

Plattform:

Forgotten password?

Registration

Quintessence Int 25 (1994), No. 9     1. Sep. 1994
Quintessence Int 25 (1994), No. 9  (01.09.1994)

Page 647-649


Influence of dental glove type on the penetration of liquid through experimental perforation: A spectrophotometric analysis
Checchi / Montebugnoli / Boschi / D'Achille
This study was made to assess whether the physical structure or the commercial make of a glove has any influence on the penetration of liquid through perforations in the glove during work. A comparison was made between three types of gloves (10 for each brand name and type): vinyl (Peha Fit, Paul Hartmann), latex (without ASTM certification), and Biogel D (Regent Dental Division) for a total of 30 gloves. Of the 10 gloves for each type, five were worn tightly adhering to the operator's hand and five were worn relatively loosely. Holes of a predetermined size (.040 mm) were made in each glove on the index, middle, and ring fingers, for a total of 90 holes. A randomized preprogrammed list ensured a perfect balance of the three variables: type of glove, adherence to the hand, and fingers having holes. The amount of liquid that penetrated the gloves through the holes was determined by placing the gloved hand in a tank containing a colored substance for 3 minutes and then analyzing the colored substance that had penetrated the glove with an ultraviolet (UV) spectophotometer. The results clearly showed that the amount of liquid that penetrated through the holes varied significantly (p < 0.001) according to the type of glove tested. The mean quantity of liquid penetrating the vinyl gloves (6.24 uL) was approximately five times higher than that of the latex gloves (1.20 uL), and 100 times higher than that of the Biogel D gloves (0.05 uL). The statistical differences between the three types of gloves were even more significant in the cases in which the glove adhered closely to the hand (12.44 uL in vinyl, 2.37 uL in latex, and 0.09 uL in Biogel D), whereas no significant difference was found when the gloves were loose (0.03 uL in vinyl, 0.04 in latex, and 0.00 uL in Biogel D).