ライフサイエンスコーパス: glove

1 o motion analysis system and an instrumented glove.

2 e actual finger movements recorded by a data glove.

3 acitors incorporated into the wristband of a glove.

4 r task using a cursor controlled by a haptic glove.

5 use of barrier techniques such as gowns and gloves.

6 ne pathogens and do not routinely use double gloves.

7 and 83 reported that they usually use double gloves.

8 red and backscattered x rays produced by the gloves.

9 sed by the interactions of x rays inside the gloves.

10 cedures performed with sterile vs nonsterile gloves.

11 reezing weather without a hat, overcoat, and gloves.

12 tire except for sterile gowns and the use of gloves.

13 e measured in each hand with a pair of wired gloves.

14 her substrates of interest, such as surgical gloves.

15 itable for use with both latex and synthetic gloves.

16 were randomized to exchange or retain outer gloves 1 hour into clean orthopedic procedures; cultures

17 In glove study 2, surgeons retaining outer gloves 1 hour into the case had a subsequent positive gl

18 with either contact precautions or universal gloving [51% with contact precautions and 43% with unive

19 ents (7/8); (9) usage of protective clothing/gloves (8/8); (10) proper measures during outbreak (8/8)

20 Most surgeons did not routinely use double gloves: 92 of 768 surgeons reported that they always use

21 al catheter insertion, consisting of sterile gloves, a surgical cap, a surgical mask, and a small ste

22 mly assigned to receive care with nonsterile gloves after hand hygiene (group A) or care after hand h

23 cal intensive care unit and would always use gloves alone when attending 8 others.

24 se events were not associated with universal glove and gown use (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 0.81; 95

25 Universal glove and gown use also decreased health care worker roo

26 e effect of contact precautions or universal glove and gown use on adverse events.

27 s of adverse events resulting from universal glove and gown use were not supported.

28 While all trainees were observed to gown/glove and handle sharps correctly, low scores were obser

29 Human participants wore a data glove and learned to manipulate a computer cursor by mov

30 e small effects seen with the use of sterile gloves and antiseptics and antibiotics are clinically si

31 chnology enabled the production of antiviral gloves and filters (which deactivate HIV-1 and other vir

32 We assessed if wearing gloves and gowns during all patient contact in the inten

33 ll health care workers were required to wear gloves and gowns for all patient contact and when enteri

34 The use of gloves and gowns for all patient contact compared with u

35 It is unknown whether wearing gloves and gowns for all patient contact in the intensiv

36 In ICUs where healthcare workers donned gloves and gowns for all patient contact, patients were

37 d trial required that healthcare workers use gloves and gowns for all patient contact.

38 Universal use of gloves and gowns was no better than universal use of glo

39 that all hospital employees would always use gloves and gowns when attending 8 particular beds in the

40 atient procedures with sterile or nonsterile gloves and had follow-up regarding SSI.

41 specific inhalation challenge (SIC) with NRL gloves and in 25 symptomatic subjects with a negative ch

42 Four sets of radiation-attenuating flexible gloves and one set of standard surgical gloves were test

43 ught to be viral in nature: papular purpuric gloves and socks syndrome; pityriasis rosea; unilateral

44 ot noticed, except for sporadic use of latex gloves and surgical masks.This is believed to be the fir

45 conformal integration on curved surfaces of gloves and thin, refractive-index monitors wrapped on tu

46 contamination associated with changing outer gloves and using disposable spunlace paper versus reusab

47 on ICUs of the 20-site Benefits of Universal Gloving and Gowning cluster randomized trial required th

48 including outer glove exchange while double-gloving and surgical gown type selection.

49 s or allergens (e.g., by wearing impermeable gloves) and applying emollients and potent topical gluco

50 10 (45.5%) eye protection, 72 (23.2%) double gloves, and 259/307 (84.4%) avoided passing sharps from

51 e the effectiveness of radiation-attenuating gloves, and secondary electron dose to basal cells in th

52 nd protruded into the afferent terminal in a glove-and-finger configuration.

53 Fifteen (16.1%) patients in the glove-and-gown group and 13 (14.8%) in the glove-only gr

54 Twenty-four (25.8%) patients in the glove-and-gown group and 21 (23.9%) in the glove-only gr

55 ts who became colonized were 8.0 days in the glove-and-gown group and 7.1 days in the glove-only grou

56 Compliance with precautions was 79% in glove-and-gown rooms and 62% in glove-only rooms (P < 0.

57 The 93 patients in glove-and-gown rooms and the 88 patients in glove-only r

58 Healthcare worker hands/gloves are frequently contaminated with A. baumannii aft

59 No-rinse disposable wash gloves are increasingly implemented in health care to re

60 of form factors, including skin patches and gloves-based sensors.

61 2; 95% CI, 1.20-3.40), use of powdered latex gloves between 1992 and 2000 (OR, 2.17; 95% CI, 1.27-3.7

62 hod may be greatly reduced if it relies on a glove box to enable the use of air- and moisture-sensiti

63 lysts, ligands, and bases) necessary for the glove-box-free palladium-catalysed carbon-fluorine, carb

64 allows the rapid detection of penetration of gloves by this virus.

65 Furthermore, cushioning of the gloves can be protective and should be increased to safe

66 hour into the case had a subsequent positive glove contamination rate of 23% compared with 13% among

67 CI, 2.10-12.60]), were associated with hand/glove contamination.

68 ty arising from fusion of digits in a mitten-glove deformity and growth retardation associated with a

69 Patients had reduced sensation with stocking-glove distribution in the distal limbs in later life.

70 Symptoms present in a "stocking-glove" distribution, with longest nerves affected most a

71 some antiseptics and antibiotics and sterile gloves during MMS were associated with modest reduction

72 Outer glove exchange just before handling implant materials is

73 of optimal aseptic technique including outer glove exchange while double-gloving and surgical gown ty

74 are sensitive to contact with both bare and gloved fingers.

75 SCA-alpha2 has a better hand-in-glove fit at the bulge site, making it an ideal platform

76 intensified hand-washing regimen, barriers (gloves, gowns), and cleaning of anesthesiologist A's hou

77 ntion ICUs, health care providers used clean gloves, gowns, and hand hygiene less frequently than req

78 to identify and isolate carriers, universal gloving, greater use of sporicidal cleaning methods, enh

79 .1%) and 121 of 6040 patients in the sterile glove group (2.0%).

80 uding 107 of 5031 patients in the nonsterile glove group (2.1%) and 121 of 6040 patients in the steri

81 s; p =.4) The infection rate in the gown and glove group (2.3 per 100 patient days) was reduced signi

82 n length of stay in the PICU in the gown and glove group (p =.014), there was a trend toward reductio

83 est, p =.07; odds ratio,.76) in the gown and glove group.

84 of glove powder on either latex or synthetic gloves had no effect on the ability of the PCR assay to

85 ater from the palm of the surgeon's dominant gloved hand and from the surgical gown sleeve.

86 either with a soft brush or directly with a gloved hand and then analysed for differences in their i

87 During the shock, the rescuer's gloved hand was pressed onto the skin of the patient's a

88 kit (boiled blade and thread, plastic sheet, gloves, hand washing, and appropriate cord care) and neo

89 icroorganisms (viruses and bacteria) to test gloves have been developed but require classical culturi

90 s identified from healthcare worker hands or gloves in 77 (30%) interactions.

91 Whether the use of sterile vs nonsterile gloves in outpatient cutaneous procedures affects the ra

92 es with information on sterile vs nonsterile gloves in outpatient surgical procedures were retrieved.

93 h contact precautions and 43% with universal gloving] in intervention ICUs vs. a median of 38% of ICU

94 sment of the barrier quality of medical exam gloves includes visual inspection and a water leak test.

95 ction in nosocomial infections, and gown and glove isolation appeared to have an additional protectiv

96 er strict handwashing or protective gown and glove isolation intervention groups.

97 The relative effect of protective gown and glove isolation was compared with strict handwashing in

98 nteractions can result in the formation of a glove-like tight binding pocket around RNA bases, but th

99 consists of a bed bath with disposable wash gloves made of non-woven waffled fibers, saturated with

100 Opening of the glove occurs by outward movements of the distal histidin

101 ong surgeons exchanging their original outer glove [odds ratio (95% confidence interval): 1.97 (1.02-

102 nd gowns was no better than universal use of gloves only in preventing rectal colonization by vancomy

103 e glove-and-gown group and 21 (23.9%) in the glove-only group acquired vancomycin-resistant enterococ

104 e glove-and-gown group and 13 (14.8%) in the glove-only group had vancomycin-resistant enterococci on

105 the glove-and-gown group and 7.1 days in the glove-only group.

106 s was 79% in glove-and-gown rooms and 62% in glove-only rooms (P < 0.001).

107 glove-and-gown rooms and the 88 patients in glove-only rooms had similar demographic and clinical ch

108 inant of transmission to healthcare workers' gloves or gowns.

109 lted in contamination of healthcare workers' gloves or gowns.

110 showed a correlation with cushioning of the gloves (p<0.05), and thus seems a protective measure reg

111 of a previously unidentified allele for the gloving pigmentation pattern found in the Birman breed s

112 The presence of glove powder on either latex or synthetic gloves had no

113 ransplantation were enrolled into a gown and glove protective isolation protocol or a strict handwash

114 mpled at room exit (prior to hand hygiene or glove removal) and then evaluated for the presence of A.

115 Glove study 1 revealed 4-fold higher levels of baseline

116 In glove study 2, surgeons retaining outer gloves 1 hour in

117 In an initial glove study, 102 surgical team members were randomized t

118 In a follow-up glove study, 251 surgical team members, all wearing pape

119 paper gowns, were randomized as in the first glove study.

120 ubstantial extracellular domain resembling a glove that contains all the divergent residues between t

121 ample, the inks can be printed on laboratory gloves that change color when exposed to bacteria.

122 By analogy to a baseball glove, the protein "catches" and then "holds" incoming l

123 rce made of GO was also written on a plastic glove to demonstrate wearability.

124 Neither method tests directly the ability of gloves to prevent penetration by microorganisms.

125 Because the use of gowns and gloves together may be associated with better compliance

126 atients were assigned to care with universal gloving until their discharge or until surveillance cult

127 We hypothesize that glove use after hand hygiene may further decrease these

128 Glove use after hand hygiene prior to patient and line c

129 65) or with other occupations in which latex glove use is common (OR = 1.01, 95 percent CI: 0.49, 2.0

130 is study examines occupations in which latex glove use is common to determine whether it is associate

131 verall relative risk for SSI with nonsterile glove use was 1.06 (95% CI, 0.81-1.39).

132 The risk associated with latex glove use was not apparent after 2000.

133 Glove use with handwashing prior to and after contact wi

134 ol measures (patient isolation, handwashing, glove use, and appropriate gown use) and implementation

135 Wearing gloves was protective (P < .005).

136 Compliance with gowning and gloving was 82% and compliance with handwashing was 76%

137 ne after 69% of contacts, and when universal gloving was specified, gloves were used for a median of

138 t health care workers who reported not using gloves were at increased risk of latex sensitization, bo

139 Healthcare worker hands/gloves were sampled at room exit (prior to hand hygiene

140 ible gloves and one set of standard surgical gloves were tested for scattering characteristics and se

141 ot associated with health care work in which gloves were used (OR = 1.17, 95 percent CI: 0.51, 2.65)

142 s, and when universal gloving was specified, gloves were used for a median of 72% of contacts and han

143 ns; when contact precautions were specified, gloves were used for a median of 82% of contacts, gowns

144 were assigned to patient cohorts, gowns and gloves were worn on room entry, compliance with infectio

145 urgeons reported that they always use double gloves when performing surgery, and 83 reported that the

146 in was found in extracts prepared from latex gloves, which were shown to be allergenic.

147 ith the welding equipment, 3) wear insulated gloves while operating electrical equipment, 4) verify t

148 of surgeons who always or usually use double gloves who also had hepatitis B vaccinations.

149 ble of real-time pulse monitoring and a PDMS glove with multiple embedded sensors to provide comprehe

150 ostatic plasticity are likely to go 'hand-in-glove' with Hebbian mechanisms to allow experience to mo