Jamal, H; Lyne, A; Ashley, P; Duane, B; (2021) Non-sterile examination gloves and sterile surgical gloves: which are more sustainable? Journal of Hospital Infection , 118 pp. 87-95. 10.1016/j.jhin.2021.10.001.

Preview

Text Ashley_LCA Medical Gloves manuscript JHI 25N copy.pdf - Accepted Version Download (811kB) | Preview

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Healthcare professionals should consider environmental sustainability when using personal protective equipment (PPE). One of the most frequently used items of PPE in medical settings are gloves. AIM: This study aims to quantify the environmental impact of sterile versus non-sterile gloves using the life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology. METHODS: This study used three glove types: non-sterile gloves and sterile gloves (latex and latex-free). Sixteen different environmental impact categories were used to demonstrate the impact of each glove type. FINDINGS: Non-sterile gloves had the least environmental impact in all categories. The two types of sterile gloves, non-latex (synthetic rubber) and latex (natural rubber), performed similarly, although the non-latex gloves had a greater impact on ozone depletion, mineral use and ionizing radiation. For climate change impact, sterile latex gloves were 11.6 times higher than non-sterile gloves. This study found that for both sterile type gloves (latex and non-latex), the manufacture of the gloves contributes to the most considerable environmental impact, with an average of 64.37% for sterile latex gloves and 60.48% for non-latex sterile gloves. CONCLUSION: Using the LCA methodology, this study quantitatively demonstrated the environmental impact of sterile versus non-sterile gloves.

Download activity - last month

Export as CSVXMLJSON

Download activity - last 12 months

Export as XMLCSVJSON

Downloads by country - last 12 months

Export as JSONCSVXML

Archive Staff Only

View Item