Practice abstract
British Dental Journal 195, 686 - 690 (2003)
Published online: 20 December 2003 | doi:10.1038/sj.bdj.4810821
Subject Categories: Dental equipment | Medical matters
Adverse reactions to protective gloves used in the dental profession: experience of the UK Adverse Reaction Reporting Project
A Scott1, D J Gawkrodger2, C Yeoman3, W Egner4, R van Noort5, P V Hatton6 & J Grummitt7
- The collection of data on adverse reactions to dental materials has shown that gloves produce nearly 50% of all adverse reactions reported.
- The analysis of the reports provides us with the necessary evidence on which to base our judgement of the safe use of dental gloves.
- This article shows that both patients and dental professionals are potentially at risk from an adverse reaction to gloves.
- Although most glove-related adverse reactions were resolved or controlled, a substantial number of those experienced by dental professionals (14%) were potentially life- or career- threatening.
Abstract
The Adverse Reaction Reporting Project (ARRP) was set up to measure the extent and severity of adverse reactions to dental materials in the UK. Further analysis into the use of protective gloves has been carried out to establish the degree to which gloves are having a deleterious effect on the dental profession. In addition the survey aimed to establish the techniques used to manage adverse reactions and their effectiveness.
In a 23-month period, 369 reports were received concerning adverse reactions to protective gloves used in dental practices. Reporters were contacted for further information, and a 92% response rate was achieved. The 330 reports analysed showed dentists to be the largest group to report adverse reactions, whilst dental technicians reported the fewest. The referral rate for staff and patients was similar with a third of adverse reactions being referred (n=110) to a specialist for diagnosis. A confirmed diagnosis was received in 65% of referred cases (n=72), but the symptoms reported suggested a larger degree of Type I reactions occurring than diagnosed. The use of non-powdered gloves appeared to be favoured over powdered gloves in 42% of glove changes, and nitrile gloves were used as an alternative to latex in 39% of changes.
In conclusion, the results from this survey showed that wearing gloves in dental practices in the UK caused a range of adverse reactions. In 79% (n=330) of cases reported and analysed, these reactions were readily resolved or improved by self-medication, prescribed medication and / or changing to a different type of protective glove.
- Research Assistant, Department of Adult Dental Care, University of Sheffield, Sheffield
- Consultant in Dermatology, Department of Dermatology, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Glossop Road, Sheffield
- Consultant in Oral Medicine, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals, Charles Clifford Dental Hospital, Wellesley Road, Sheffield
- Consultant in Immunology, Department of Immunology, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals, Northern General Hospital, PO Box 894, Sheffield
- Professor in Dental Materials, Department of Adult Dental Care, University of Sheffield, Sheffield
- Reader of Biomaterials, Department of Adult Dental Care, University of Sheffield, Sheffield
- Compton Acres Dental Practice, West Bridgford, Nottingham.
Correspondence to: R van Noort5
Department of Adult Dental Care, University of Sheffield, Sheffield S10 2TA
e-mail: r.vannoort@sheffield.ac.uk