Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 23, 2026

Virtual Hand with Ambiguous Movement between the Self and Other Origin: Sense of Ownership and 'Other-Produced' Agency
Published on: October 28, 2020
Quantifying the rambunctious journey of the anesthesia provider's hands during simulated, routine care
Chuck Biddle1, Kathryn Robinson1, Benjamin Pike1
1Departments of Nurse Anesthesia & Anesthesiology, Virginia Commonwealth University Medical Center, Richmond, VA.
Background:
The role of anesthesia providers in dispersing potentially pathogenic material from one patient to another during intraoperative care needs further study. In this study we aimed (1) to quantify the dispersion of a surrogate pathogen from a simulated patient's mouth to the anesthesia workstation during routine anesthetic induction, (2) to test the hypothesis that there would be fewer contamination sites by providers who used a double-gloving technique, and (3) to examine the effectiveness of between-case anesthesia apparatus disinfection.
Methods:
Twenty subjects were randomized to a single pair of gloves group (group 1) or a double-gloved group (group 2) and completed a simulated general anesthesia induction, completing a standardized set of interventions. Dispersion of a surrogate pathogen dye placed in the oral cavity of the simulated patient was tracked by a blinded observer and photography. Standard cleaning of the workstation was performed, and residual dye was quantified. Group performance was plotted using regression analysis and rate of contamination compared using parametric statistics.
Results:
Group 1 contaminated an average of 16.0 (SEM = 0.89) sites compared with group 2, who contaminated an average of 7.6 (SEM = 0.85). The cart drawers, gas flow dials, medication vials, and ventilator controls were significantly contaminated by group 1, but not by group 2 (P < .05 in all cases). There were similar rates of contamination in both groups for the airway equipment, breathing system, intravenous access ports, and the roll of tape used to secure the endotracheal tube. Once the airway management phase of the induction ended, new site contamination continued at a high rate in group 1 but not group 2.
Conclusions:
A double-gloving technique was associated with less spread of an oral inoculum to the workstation but was not uniformly protective. Between-case cleaning was ineffective in removing the contaminant, indicating that biologic material from one patient may be present when subsequent patients are cared for. This suggests risks for the current patient (eg, skin or oral site transfer to an intravenous site) and also may place future patients at risk. Importantly, using models that simulate actual clinical events can inform clinical practice and decipher challenging areas of ergonomics.
Insights
Double-gloving by anesthesia providers significantly reduced pathogen spread to workstations. However, between-case cleaning was ineffective, posing risks to current and future patients.
Area of Science:
- Anesthesiology
- Infection Control
- Patient Safety
Background:
- Anesthesia providers may inadvertently transfer pathogens between patients during intraoperative care.
- The extent of pathogen dispersion and the effectiveness of infection control measures require further investigation.
Purpose of the Study:
- To quantify pathogen dispersion from a simulated patient's mouth to the anesthesia workstation.
- To evaluate if double-gloving reduces contamination sites compared to single-gloving.
- To assess the efficacy of between-case anesthesia apparatus disinfection.
Main Methods:
- Twenty subjects simulated general anesthesia induction, randomized to single or double-gloving.
- A surrogate pathogen dye was used to track dispersion from the simulated patient's oral cavity.
- Contamination sites were quantified, and workstation cleaning effectiveness was evaluated.
Main Results:
- Double-gloving (7.6 sites) significantly reduced contamination compared to single-gloving (16.0 sites).
- Key workstation areas like cart drawers and ventilator controls were less contaminated with double-gloving.
- Contamination persisted after airway management, with new site contamination continuing in the single-gloved group.
Conclusions:
- Double-gloving limits pathogen spread to anesthesia workstations but is not fully protective.
- Between-case cleaning protocols were ineffective, indicating potential for pathogen persistence.
- Findings highlight risks to current and future patients and inform clinical practice and ergonomics.
More Related Videos
14:52Recording Brain Electromagnetic Activity During the Administration of the Gaseous Anesthetic Agents Xenon and Nitrous Oxide in Healthy Volunteers
Published on: January 13, 2018
05:21Characterization of the Sense of Agency over the Actions of Neural-machine Interface-operated Prostheses
Published on: January 7, 2019
Related Concept Videos
Handwashing II: Pre-procedure and Initial Procedure Steps
The hand washing procedure itself includes the following steps. First, cover cuts, if any, on hands with a waterproof dressing. Cuts and abrasions can become contaminated with bacteria hindering the ability to clean the area thoroughly. In addition, repeated hand washing can worsen an injury. The nails must be short and clean, without nail...
General Anesthesia: Overview
General anesthesia induces unconsciousness in the whole body, while the others target specific areas or sensations. It is administered to minimize adverse effects, maintain...
Stages of General Anesthesia
Handwashing III: During the Procedure and Post-Procedure Steps
Hand hygiene
Hand washing...
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation II: ACLS Airway Management