The surgeon’s daily workload renders him/her susceptible to a variety of the common work-related illness. They are exposed to a number of occupational hazards in their professional work. These hazards include sharp injuries, blood borne pathogens, latex allergy, laser plumes, hazardous chemicals, anesthetic gases, equipment hazards, static postures, and job related stressors. However, many pay little attention to their health, and neither do they seek the appropriate help when necessary. It is observed that occupational hazards pose a huge risk to the personal well-being of surgeons. As such, the importance of early awareness and education alongside prompt intervention is duly emphasized. Therefore, increased attention to the health, economic, personal, and social implications of these injuries is essential for appropriate management and future prevention. These risks are as great as any other occupational hazards affecting surgeons today. The time has come to recognize and address them.
Aim: While the requirements for single-use gloves for staff protection are clearly defined, the conventional medical differentiation between “sterile surgical gloves” used during surgical procedures and “single-use medical gloves” used in non-sterile medical areas does not adequately define the different requirements in these two areas of use. Sterilization of single-use medical gloves is not performed if sterility is not required; thus, another terminology must be found to identify the safety quality of non-sterile single-use medical gloves. Therefore, the labeling of such gloves should reflect this situation, by introducing the term “pathogen-free” single-use glove. The hygienic safety of such a glove would be attainable by ensuring aseptic manufacturing conditions during manufacturing and control of pathogen load of batch controls after fabrication. Proposed recommendation: Because single-use gloves employed in non-sterile areas come into contact not only with intact skin but also with mucous membranes, no potential pathogens should be detectable in 100 mL of rinse sample. In order to declare such gloves as pathogen-free we suggest absence of the indicator species S. aureus and E. coli. In addition, the total CFU count should be evaluated, since a high load indicates lack of optimal hygiene during the manufacturing process. Based on the requirements for potable water and findings obtained from investigations of the bacterial load of such gloves after manufacturing, the here suggested limit for the total bacterial count of <102 CFU/mL of rinse sample per glove seems realistic. Keywords: singl
 |
| Max Theiler receives the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine from the hands of His Majesty the King Gustaf Adolf VI on December 10, 1951. Photo provided by the Karolinska Institutet. |
.png)
This guide is a roadmap for a university-wide effort to strengthen a culture of research safety. The guide has action steps, resources, and recommendations to help navigate the challenge of changing the culture of the institution. The guide is intended for university presidents and chancellors who have made a renewed commitment to improve their institutional culture of safety, and it is intended for the campus leadership team that the president appoints to helm this effort. The task force encourages each institution to use the guide in ways that fits their unique institutional contexts. The task force has identified 20 recommendations for implementing and sustaining a culture of academic and research safety, primarily drawn from four foundational reports: Safe Science: Promoting a Culture of Safety in Academic Chemical Research (National Research Council, 2014); Creating Safety Cultures in Academic Institutions (ACS, 2012); Creating a Safety Culture (OSHA, 1989); and Texas Tech Laboratory Explosion Case Study (CSB, 2010). This guide includes an analysis showing the alignment of the 20 recommendations with these key national reports.
