|Articles|August 24, 2021

Infection Control Today

  • Infection Control Today, October 2021 (Vol. 25 No. 7)
  • Volume 25
  • Issue 8

Beware of Gown-Glove Interface

Author(s)Frank Diamond

There needs to be a national standard for measuring the effectiveness of personal protective equipment at its most vulnerable spot—the wrist, urge CDC investigators.

P

roper donning and doffing of personal protective equipment (PPE) lowers the chance of spreading pathogens in a hospital or other health care facility. It involves several steps, but it’s worth doing well because the equipment protects patients and health care workers from the many deadly pathogens that can strike. COVID-19 and its variants aren’t the only dangers infection preventionists (IPs) have to deal with.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) offers IPs and other health care professionals a step-by-step guide for how best to put on and take off PPE.1 And as the CDC’s National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) notes, the various parts of PPE may come from different sources, or manufacturers, and that presents a problem.2

PPE may not fit as snuggly as it should. “A particularly vulnerable area is where the glove and gown meet: the glove-gown interface,” NIOSH points out. “This interface is considered one of the weakest areas because gaps can occur, allowing infectious fluids to seep through to the skin.” Recently, CDC investigators measured just how much pathogenic leakage can occur at the interface. Their findings, published in the American Journal of Infection Control, led them to conclude that there needs to be a national standard developed for measuring the safety of the glove-gown interface.3 That standard must take into account the various design factors of the different models of gloves and gowns.

The investigators evaluated “the fluid leakage through the glove-gown interface by simulating exposures and HCP [health care personnel] arm movements in patient care. We tested fluid leakage of 2 examination gloves with different cuff lengths and 7 isolation gown models designed with varying levels of barrier resistance and multiple cuff types.”

Gowns with a thumb loop design provided the best protection. The next best was the elastic cuff design, followed by the knit cuff design. But the investigators didn’t think any of the designs provided the proper protection because they found substantial leakage through gown fabrics.

They concluded that there’s “a need to develop a standardized method to evaluate leakage at the glove-gown interface to improve worker protection.”

That conclusion mirrors what NIOSH says about the glove-gown interface.

“Despite this concern, the glove-gown interface has received little research attention, so minimal guidance is available on how to prevent gaps. Furthermore, no standardized test currently exists to evaluate leakages in new products,” NIOSH says.

References:

  1. Sequence for putting on personal protective equipment (PPE). CDC. Accessed September 7, 2021. https://www.cdc.gov/hai/pdfs/ppe/ppe-sequence.pdf
  2. Inside NIOSH: robotic arm tests glove-gown protection in healthcare. NIOSH Research Rounds. CDC. Updated April 15, 2019. Accessed September 7, 2021. https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/research-rounds/resroundsv4n10.html
  3. Kahveci Z, Kilinc-Balci FS, Yorio PL. A simulation study to assess fluid leakage through the glove-gown interface in isolation settings. Am J Infect Control. Published online August 21, 2021. doi:10.1016/j.ajic.2021.08.013


Related to this article

A group of students raising their hands in class during a lecture  (Adobe Stock 292282454 by Mediteraneo
How do you celebrate an infection that never happened? That's one of the unusual challenges infection preventionists share with teachers. Both can spend their careers changing outcomes they may never see. Both educate people who don't always want to listen. Both are second-guessed. Both face burnout. And both must somehow keep remembering why they started.
Infection preventionists in full PPE with children in DRC.  (Image credit: author with AI)
Nearly 4 months into the DRC's Bundibugyo virus disease outbreak, some indicators suggest transmission may be slowing. But shifting hotspots, treatment-center capacity problems, community deaths, and incomplete surveillance data show why national case totals alone cannot determine whether containment has been achieved.
Health care workers from the US speaking with other health care workers in DRC.  (Image credit: author with AI)
Is the Ebola outbreak in the DRC getting better? The answer depends on which numbers you examine. Several important indicators are moving in the right direction, including slower case growth and a declining Rₜ. But major gaps remain in contact tracing, testing, community deaths, safe burial coverage, and treatment capacity in some of the hardest-hit areas. ICT takes a deeper look at the latest outbreak data and why the numbers suggest cautious optimism, not victory.
Dyan Troxell, MSN, RN, director of clinical education at HandCraft Linen Services; J.J. Odom, MBA, CHESP, CMIP, T-CHEST, university director of buildings and grounds for UConn Health and chair-elect of the AHE Board; and Jenna Rivers, MPH, CPH, CIC, manager of infection prevention and control at Moffitt Cancer Center in Tampa, Florida.
At AHE Exchange 2026, ICT spoke with experts representing commercial laundry services, EVS, and infection prevention about the systems behind a successful reusable linen program. They discuss linen quality, reject rates, unnecessary waste, frontline education, data, PAR levels, infection prevention oversight, and why strong relationships between health care facilities and their laundry providers matter.