We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Original Investigation |

Comparison of Sterile vs Nonsterile Gloves in Cutaneous Surgery and Common Outpatient Dental Procedures A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Jerry D. Brewer, MD1; Alexandra B. Gonzalez, MD2; Christian L. Baum, MD1; Christopher J. Arpey, MD1; Randall K. Roenigk, MD1; Clark C. Otley, MD1; Patricia J. Erwin, MLS3
[+] Author Affiliations
1Division of Dermatologic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
2Center for Clinical and Translational Science, Mayo Graduate School, Rochester, Minnesota
3Mayo Medical Library, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
JAMA Dermatol. 2016;152(9):1008-1014. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2016.1965.
Text Size: A A A
Published online

Importance  Whether the use of sterile vs nonsterile gloves in outpatient cutaneous procedures affects the rate of postoperative wound infection is unknown.

Objective  To explore rates of surgical site infection (SSI) with the use of sterile vs nonsterile gloves in outpatient cutaneous surgical procedures.

Data Sources  This systematic review and meta-analysis identified studies from Ovid MEDLINE (1946 to present), Ovid Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (1991 to present), Ovid EMBASE (1988 to present), EBSCO Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (1980 to present), Scopus (1996 to present), and Web of Science (1975 to present).

Study Selection  Studies with information on sterile vs nonsterile gloves in outpatient surgical procedures were retrieved. Only randomized clinical trials and comparative studies were included for final analysis.

Data Extraction  Data of trial design, surgery characteristics, and outcomes from published manuscripts and unpublished data were independently extracted.

Main Outcomes and Measures  Randomized clinical trials were considered high quality if randomization, allocation concealment, blinding, and follow-up completeness were appropriate. Relative risk and 95% CIs were derived for postoperative wound infections.

Results  Fourteen articles met eligibility and inclusion criteria for systematic review; they included 12 275 unique patients who had undergone 12 275 unique outpatient procedures with sterile or nonsterile gloves and had follow-up regarding SSI. With the exclusion of 1 single-arm observational study of 1204 patients, 11 071 patients from 13 studies remained in the meta-analysis. Of these, 228 patients were documented as having postoperative SSI (2.1%), including 107 of 5031 patients in the nonsterile glove group (2.1%) and 121 of 6040 patients in the sterile glove group (2.0%). Overall relative risk for SSI with nonsterile glove use was 1.06 (95% CI, 0.81-1.39).

Conclusions and Relevance  No difference was found in the rate of postoperative SSI between outpatient surgical procedures performed with sterile vs nonsterile gloves.

Figures in this Article


Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure 1.
Flow Diagram

The prospective single-arm observational study included in the systematic review was excluded from the meta-analysis.

Graphic Jump Location
Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure 2.

Meta-analysis includes findings of studies of surgical site infections with sterile vs nonsterile gloves after outpatient procedures. RR indicates relative risk. The size of the diamond represents the 95% CI of the overall assessment. If the diamond is wide, there is less confidence that it is accurate; however, if the diamond is narrow and small, then there is a higher confidence that the final analysis is accurately representing the truth.

Graphic Jump Location




Also Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
Please click the checkbox indicating that you have read the full article in order to submit your answers.
Your answers have been saved for later.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.


Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

0 Citations

Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

Related Multimedia

Author Interview

audio player

Articles Related By Topic
Related Collections
PubMed Articles