Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 14, 2026
An Alternative to the Traditional Cold Pressor Test: The Cold Pressor Arm Wrap
Published on: January 16, 2014
Looking for Holes in Sterile Wrapping: How Accurate Are We?
Christopher H Rashidifard1, Hani A Mayassi, Chelsea M Bush
1C. H. Rashidifard, C. M. Bush, B. M. Opalacz, P. M. Muccino, T. G. DiPasquale, Orthopedics Department, WellSpan York Hospital, York, PA, USA H. A. Mayassi, University of New England College of Osteopathic Medicine, Biddeford, ME, USA M. W. Richardson, Orthopedics Department, MedStar Union Memorial Hospital, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Background:
Defects in sterile surgical wrapping are identified by the presence of holes through which light can be seen. However, it is unknown how reliably the human eye can detect these defects.
Questions/Purposes:
The purpose of this study was to determine (1) how often holes in sterile packaging of various sizes could be detected; and (2) whether differences in lighting, experience level of the observer, or time spent inspecting the packaging were associated with improved likelihood of detection of holes in sterile packaging.
Methods:
Thirty participants (10 surgical technicians, 13 operating room nurses, seven orthopaedic surgery residents) inspected sterile sheets for perforations under ambient operating room (OR) lighting and then again with a standard powered OR lamp in addition to ambient lighting. There were no additional criteria for eligibility other than willingness to participate. Each sheet contained one of nine defect sizes with four sheets allocated to each defect size. Ten wraps were controls with no defects. Participants were allowed as much time as necessary for inspection.
Results:
Holes ≥ 2.5 mm were detected more often than holes ≤ 2 mm (87% [832 of 960] versus 7% [82 of 1200]; odds ratio, 88.6 [95% confidence interval, 66.2-118.6]; p < 0.001). There was no difference in detection accuracy between OR lamp and ambient lightning nor experience level. There was no correlation between inspection time and detection accuracy.
Conclusions:
Defects ≤ 2 mm were not reliably detected with respect to lighting, time, or level of experience. Future research is warranted to determine defect sizes that are clinically meaningful.
Level Of Evidence:
Level II, diagnostic study.
Related Concept Videos
01:10Detection of Black Holes
Their closest cousins are neutron stars, which are composed almost entirely of neutrons packed against each other, making them extremely dense. A neutron star has the same mass as the Sun but its diameter is only a few kilometers. Therefore, the escape velocity from their surface is close to the speed of light.
Not until the 1960s, when the first neutron...
01:30Cleaning, Sterilization, and Disinfection
Cleaning
The cleaning process usually involves using water with detergents or enzymatic cleaner and removing foreign material from objects and surfaces, including organic material such as body fluids or inorganic material like soil. Cleaning is performed before high-level disinfection and sterilization because foreign materials on the cover of the devices interfere with process...
01:30Methods of Sterilization II: Chemical Methods
Using chemical sterilization rather than heat to clean out equipment is recommended. It eradicates and removes all bacteria,...
01:29Methods of Sterilization I: Physical Methods
Steam sterilization uses non-toxic, low-cost moist heat in the form of saturated steam under pressure, which is fast, microbicidal, and sporicidal, and quickly warms and penetrates fabrics. Autoclaves, or steam sterilizers, expose each item to direct steam contact for a predetermined time at the necessary...
00:58DNA Packaging
03:37Uncertainty in Measurement: Accuracy and Precision