Double gloving and a glove perforation indication system during the dentaltreatment of HIV-positive patients: Are they necessary?

Aim The aim of this study was to compare the incidence of glove perforation when double gloved or single gloved during the routine treatment of HIV-po sitive patients. In addition, a glove perforation indication system based o n a double gloving technique was assessed. Design Prospective, randomised and open study of glove perforation. Methods 138 consecutive HIV-positive patients underwent routine dental trea tment by senior dental staff and dental hygienists in a teaching hospital. Staff wore either single gloves (Regent Biogel D or standard surgical glove s) or double gloves (Regent 'Reveal' perforation indication system or stand ard surgical gloves). A subjective assessment of glove comfort, sensitivity and ease of donning was made using a visual analogue scale. Results The incidence of glove perforation/procedure was low, 2.9%. There w ere no skin penetrating injuries, visible exposure to body fluids or unnoti ced perforations. Double gloving was subjectively less comfortable and sens itive than single gloving (P < 0.0001). The glove perforation indication sy stem did not increase the detection of intra-operative perforations. Conclusions There is unlikely to be any significant benefit from the use of a double gloving technique or perforation indication system during the rou tine dental treatment of HIV-positive patients.