Are gloves no longer used by medical staff?

[gordyslovesheep]

Genuine question really as I was a bit puzzled (although not outraged or shaken or distressed in anyway ) yesterday when I gave blood and every single person didn't wear gloves

Not the nurse who took my history, pricked my finger, squeezed it and used a pipette to collect a sample or the scary nurse who swabbed my arm, stuck a big needle in, took 3 blood samples and a full pint off me.

I was just a bit taken a back - I guess I am old school C1981 don't die of ignorance when everyone who came within 10 feet of blood wore a space suit

so is this lack of gloves normal now - it didn't bother me massively just made me do a double take

I think it's due to being able to palpate and find veins much better without gloves

makes sense - I just wondered about the risk to them really

My dh goes for weekly blood tests, they always use gloves. I would find it a little odd if they didn't.

Some do some don't.

Its odd for those not taking the blood to not wear gloves though

Gloves are mainly to protect the patient from infection. When giving blood the risk of infection is very small so wearing them is really wasteful as unless you change them between each donor there's no point in wearing them at all. The main risk to staff is a needle stick and gloves don't prevent that. As long as hands are washed regularly gloves are unnecessary.

Gloves would always be worn when there are burns or open wounds involved.

That also makes sense - thanks - it just puzzled me a bit!

Gloves should be worn, mainly to protect staff. Needlesticks are less dangerous with gloves.

It is however easier not to wear gloves.

If gloves were to protect staff then it would be fine to wear the same pair for the whole day. In fact they are to protect patients and so they need to be changed between patients to prevent cross infection. With giving blood, where donors are about as healthy as anyone having blood taken is going to be the general risk of infection is very small so on the whole it makes sense for staff to have bare hands and wash them regularly than to waste 20 pairs of gloves each or wear one pair of gloves that gets progressively dirtier as the day goes on.

Of course if a staff member had a wound on their hand they would have to wear gloves.

They don't get changed often enough and IME most often the wearers are only protecting themselves.

I had the same observation last week on a ward I'll be working on starting next week.
I don't really care if they choose to risk it for themselves but I'll continue to wear gloves. I palpate and find veins without gloves, then put them on for the actual procedure, thats what I've been doing for over 20 years and will continue to do. It's for me as well as the patient.

When you think about it, whether wearing gloves is for the benefit of the patient or nurse, you're not going to get a lower risk environment than giving blood. You're not allowed to give blood if you have HIV or another blood borne disease, or for a certain amount of time after participating in activities that put you at risk of catching a blood borne disease. So the chances of a person giving blood having such an illness must be lower than in the general population.

And if you are giving blood you are presumably in good health on the day, unlike with blood tests where they are commonly given to find out the cause of an acute illness or to monitor a chronic illness.

So the risks of nurse catching something or the patient getting ill from an infection are at the lowest they can be.

So while I hadn't really thought about it before, I can see why nurses would choose not to wear gloves while dealing with people giving blood.

However, the nurse who does my blood tests does wear gloves and changes them with every patient as I see her put a fresh pair on and throw them away after taking my sample.

I don't wear gloves for taking blood samples from women. I do wear them if I cannulate. Hospital policy says I have to wear them for cannulation, my choice for venepuncture.

I believe tha research now says you don't even need to swab the skin prior to taking a blood sample. Might be different for actually taking blood though as I guess its a bigger needle and Therefore more chance of infection?

Gloves are only any use for protecting patients if the users hands are washed before and after using them and they are changed regularly. If you want infection prevented, you're better off making sure the person doing the procedure washes their hands before they touch you.

I'm sure there's research somewhere that workers who wear gloves for everything are less likely to wash their hands than those who only where gloves when absolutely anything (obviously gloves essential when dealing with wounds and other higher risk body fluids e.g catheters, poo; but not essential if you are helping someone wash their face).

That's right tea. Gloves give the appearance of safety and cleanliness but washed hands are just as good if not better in some circumstances. In terms of protecting patients, it's possible for a hcp wearing gloves ti get some substance (blood/poo/whatever) on the glove and not feel it before then getting that substance on the patient. People not wearing gloves tend to be more careful and will obviously feel anything that gets on their hands.
Gloves are essential in some situations but a hindrance and even unhelpful in others.

Non sterile Gloves (usually from a tissue style box) to protect me, sterile gloves to protect the patient if required, otherwise hand washing sufficient, is how I think of it. I take blood without gloves.

WHO research has shown that in many instances wearing gloves breeds complacency. Washing hands according to WHO guidelines far more effective at protecting patients.
Swabbing the skin was never about infection, it actually makes the vein standout and easier to see. There is some evidence the surgical spirit carried through the skin on the needle can cause irritation in some cases.

Hands should be washed at the beginning of every session and disinfected using alcohol gel (or equivalent) between patients. That's the guidance in htm 01-05 and what it says on our hand washing posters at work. But we wear gloves for every procedure.

I have three monthly blood tests up the hospital and they never wear gloves.

gloves do protect the wearer in the event of needlestick as the glove would wipe some of the blood off the needle as penetrating glove also it does slow penetration down a little, I'm a dentist I would not think of not wearing gloves and I wear a clean pair for every patient regardless of what I have done even if just impressions or just held a mirror to look a 3 years olds teeth

however gloves are not necessary for all patient contact

i meant offer the wearer some protection if you are getting a needlestick injury it is better to have one wearing gloves than not

I gave blood the other day and they didnt wear gloves. The woman who inserted the needle did use that hand gel stuff first though.

Could it also be partly to do with all the hand-rubs that are available these days, in that they offer a level of protection?