PUB458.pdf (98.46 kB)
The effect of microbiological containment systems on dexterity
journal contribution
posted on 2007-06-06, 10:40 authored by Jo Sawyer, Allan Bennett, Victoria HainesVictoria Haines, Edward Elton, Kathryn Crago, Sara SpeightMicrobiology laboratories use containment equipment such as safety cabinets
and isolators or respiratory protective equipment to protect workers against
aerosol infection hazards. There is a perception amongst microbiologists that
using sharps within containment equipment would increase the operator’s chance
of accidental injury due to losses of dexterity within containment and so
respiratory protection equipment is the favoured method of containment for these
procedures. Using three methods of manual dexterity testing, the effect of latex
gloves, a positive pressure respirator, and four forms of containment equipment,
a class II safety cabinet, a class III safety cabinet, a half suit and a flexible film
isolator were tested against the performance on these tests using bare hands in
20 subjects. With the exception of latex gloves, the personal protective
equipment and containment equipment all had a statistically significant
detrimental effect on manual dexterity compared to working with bare hands
alone. The use of containment systems, especially barrier containment systems
such as Class III cabinets and isolators, in the microbiology laboratory
significantly reduces dexterity and may increase the chances of accidents
occurring within. The use of positive pressure respirators with double gloves also
affects dexterity but to a lesser extent. The use of sharps should be minimised
within containment equipment. Risk assessment may be required to address the
comparative risk of aerosol and needlestick infection with different agents in
order to choose the most appropriate containment systems.
History
School
- Design
Citation
SAWYER, J. et al, 2007. The effect of microbiological containment systems on dexterity. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene, 4(3), pp. 166-173Publisher
© Taylor & FrancisPublication date
2007Notes
This article was published in the journal, Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene [© Taylor & Francis]. The definitive version is available at: http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713657996.ISSN
1545-9632Language
- en