Randomized trial of blunt-tipped versus cutting needles to reduce glove puncture during mass closure of the abdomen. Glove perforation during hip arthroplasty. A randomised prospective study of a new taperpoint needle. Do blunt tipped needles reduce the risk of glove puncture and needlestick injury in the suture of episiotomy and perineal repair? Randomized clinical trial comparing blunt tapered and standard needles in closing abdominal fascia. Influence of blunt needles on surgical glove perforation and safety for the surgeon. [The risk of needle-stick-injuries during abdominal closure]. Blunt needles for the reduction of needlestick injuries during cesarean delivery: a randomized controlled trial. Needle stick injury. Reducing the risk.
Eighty-five consecutive patients were randomized to undergo mass closure of the abdomen with no. 1 polydioxanone mounted on either a blunt-tipped (n = 46) or cutting (n = 39) needle. Gloves were changed before closure and tested for perforation afterwards using standard air or water techniques. Fourteen pairs of gloves were punctured when using a cutting needle, and three pairs when a blunt-tipped needle was used. The majority of punctures were to the non-dominant glove. The surgeon was aware of the puncture in eight of the 14 instances involving a sharp needle and in one of the three involving a blunt-tipped needle. Blunt-tipped needles, while not eliminating the risk, significantly reduced the incidence of surgical glove puncture (P < 0.001, Fisher's exact test). The use of cutting needles for abdominal closure should be abandoned. Exposure to blood is a hazard for all surgeons. We assessed the incidence of glove perforation and needlestick injury from a new blunt taperpoint needle designed to penetrate tissues other than skin with the minimum of force. We performed a prospective, randomised trial comparing the incidence of perforations of surgical gloves with the new needle and a standard cutting needle during wound closure after hip arthroplasties. There was at least one glove perforation in 46 of 69 such procedures (67%). The use of the taperpoint needle produced a significant decrease in perforations (p = 0.049). nan Glove perforation frequently occurs during the course of surgical procedures, introducing risks for both surgeons and patients. The aim of this study was to compare the use of blunt tapered and "sharp" needles during abdominal wall closure with respect to the incidence of glove perforation and the convenience of needle handling. A series of 200 patients undergoing laparotomy in a 6-month period for general surgical disorders were randomized to two groups; in one, the abdominal fascia was closed with a blunt tapered needle; in the other, a sharp needle was used. The main outcome measures were glove perforation and convenience of handling the needle. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed. In all, 56 glove perforations occurred during 40 (20%) surgical procedures. Perforation rates differed significantly: 12% for the blunt (n = 100) tapered needle and 28% (n = 100) for the sharp needle (p = 0.003). Only in 12 cases (21%) was the glove perforation detected at surgery. The type of needle (odds ratio 0.35, p = 0.006) and time taken to close the fascia (odds ratio 1.001, p = 0.05) significantly affected the risk of glove perforation. At multivariate logistic regression analysis the type of needle (odds ratio 0.23, p = 0.004) and the visual analog linear scale (VAS) for ease of needle handling (odds ratio 1.18, p = 0.019) were important predictive factors for glove perforation. With the blunt tapered needle, the VAS was significantly (p = 0.0003) higher at primary laparotomy than at relaparotomy. Use of the blunt tapered needle reduces the incidence of glove perforation. Laborious closure predicts glove perforation. Blunt tapered needles are less convenient in closing a scarred abdominal fascia. Round-tipped blunt needle (BN) may decrease the risk of needlestick injuries and hand contamination. We prospectively determined the incidence of glove perforations in emergency abdominal procedures and the efficacy of BN in increasing the safety for surgeons.
                Two hundred patients were randomized to undergo closure of the abdominal fascia using sharp needle (SN) or BN. Gloves were tested at the end of the procedure.
                Surgeons had 14 needlestick injuries and 76 perforations recorded in 69 pair of gloves. Sharp needles were responsible for all injuries and 58 (76%) perforations (P < 0.00004 and P < 0.00001, respectively). This difference was still higher when considering the perforations related to the abdominal fascia closure (BN 7% versus SN 50%; P < 0.0006).
                The risk of glove perforation is sevenfold greater if SN are used. Blunt needles reduce sharp injuries and improve safety for surgeons. A randomized study is being presented, which compares closure of laparotomy with 2 different needles (sharp: HR48, blunt: HR48PP = protect point). Handling and glove perforation rate is to be compared. 400 gloves in 100 laparotomies have been tested. Slightly more effort was reported from the surgeon to perforate the fascia with the blunt needle, but there was also a significantly lower perforation rate in the glove of his non-dominant hand. To avoid a contamination during operation the use of blunt needles has to be recommended. To compare the rate of glove perforation as a proxy for needlestick injuries between blunt and sharp needles used during cesarean-delivery closure and to survey physician satisfaction with blunt needles.
                Patients requiring cesarean delivery were assigned randomly to receive closure with either blunt (study group) or sharp needles (control group). Patient demographics, operator experience, and other clinical variables were collected. Physicians reported any percutaneous injuries and were surveyed regarding satisfaction with the assigned needles. Glove perforation was determined using a validated water-test method. Differences between patient groups were tested using chi and Fisher exact test for categorical variables and Student t-test or Wilcoxon rank-sum test for continuous variables.
                There were 194 patients enrolled in the trial: 97 in the control group and 97 in the study group. There were no statistical differences between groups in patient demographics. There were no differences between groups in clinical variables, type of cesarean delivery, or experience level of the surgeon. There was a significant reduction in total glove perforation rate for the primary surgeon with blunt needles (7.2%) compared with sharp needles (17.5%) (relative risk [RR] 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.49-0.89) as well as for the assistant surgeon (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.41-0.71). There was poor correlation between reported perforations and those detected by water test (R=0.3). Physicians reported that they were not as satisfied with blunt needles compared with sharp needles (P=.001).
                There was a significant decrease in the rate of glove perforation for surgeons and assistants performing cesarean-delivery closure with blunt needles. Assistant surgeons had the greatest reduction in glove perforations. However, physicians reported decreased satisfaction performing the surgery with blunt needles.
                ClinicalTrials.gov, www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT00844636
                I. The incidence of penetrating skin wounds and needle penetration of gloves during operation was studied in orthopaedic surgeons. Significant hand wounds were found in 11% of surgeons before operations. Glove penetration during closure of the deep tissues occurred in 16% of outer gloves and 6% of inner gloves when standard needle points were used. The surgeon sustained a needle-stick injury in 6% of this group. When a needle with a protective point was used, there were no glove perforations. This simple precaution reduces the risk of transmission of blood-borne disease during operation.
There is high quality evidence that the use of blunt needles appreciably reduces the risk of exposure to blood and bodily fluids for surgeons and their assistants over a range of operations. It is unlikely that future research will change this conclusion.