Table 9.
Evidence Profile: Double Gloves Compared to Single Gloves for Health Care Workers During Gastrointestinal Procedures
| Variable | Certainty assessment |
Patients n (%) |
Effect, RR (95% CI) |
Certainty | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No. of studies | Study design | Risk of bias | Inconsistency | Indirectness | Imprecision | Other considerations | Double gloves | Single gloves | Relative | Absolute | ||
| Contamination | 1 | Observational studies | Not serious | Not serious | Not seriousa | Seriousb | None | 5/18 (27.8) | 14/18 (77.8) | 0.36 (0.16 to 0.78) | 498 fewer per 1000 (653 fewer to 171 fewer) | □□□◯ MODERATE |
a
Study was done with the bacteriophage MS2, but the drops size was similar to SARS and COVID-19 to simulate droplet contamination, so we decided not to rate down. We recognize that there is some indirectness but we also took into account the large effect size.
b
Low event rate.