ArticleScientific reports2025
Surgical glove perforation during intramedullary nailing of intertrochanteric fractures.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Observational
- Surgical glove perforation in caesarean section and its association with surgical site infections: a prospective cohort study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Intramedullary nail fixation is a routine procedure for treatment of intertrochanteric fractures. Aseptic technique is vital for reducing postoperative complications, as intraoperative glove perforations increase the risk of surgical site infections. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence of surgical glove perforation during intramedullary nailing of intertrochanteric fractures and to identify surgery-specific steps at risk. A prospective series of 148 short intramedullary nail implantations was analysed. Intraoperative glove perforations and causative events were recorded. All gloves from the scrubbed surgical team were collected and examined for micro- and macroperforations. 1771 gloves were tested. A total of 341 perforations in 309 gloves were detected, resulting in an overall glove perforation rate of 17%. Surgeon experience had no influence on the overall incidence of glove perforations. Usage of the awl and insertion of the proximal locking screw resulted in 33.9% of all detected glove perforations. Perforation rate significantly increased with operative time (p = 0.003). Regular glove changing after surgery-specific risk-steps and during longer surgeries could decrease the rate of glove perforations during intramedullary nailing of intertrochanteric fractures and reduce the risk of potential septic contamination or even disease transmission for both, the surgeon, and the patient.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.