Experimental evaluation demonstrates rapid contactless donning and high microbial reduction in a prototype system, indicating potential to prevent cross-contamination in clinical workflows.
Cross-contamination during glove donning remains a persistent challenge in healthcare and laboratory environments, particularly when rapid and repeatable hygiene workflows are required. This study presents a contactless glove-donning prototype integrated with closed-loop vaporized hydrogen peroxide (VHP)-based decontamination, catalytic aeration, and process logging. The system comprises S/M/L glove cartridges, a 5-L VHP chamber, six injection nozzles with a flow straightener, sensor-based PID control, and a TiO2 catalytic exhaust module. Prototype performance was evaluated using Bacillus subtilis biological indicators (106 CFU), donning-cycle tests, residual H2O2 monitoring, and preliminary CFD-supported chamber uniformity analysis. At an operational condition corresponding to a 5% H2O2 source solution and 30 s exposure, the system achieved ≥ 99.9% biological indicator reduction. Across 100 donning cycles, the mean donning time was 14.6 ± 0.3 s, with donning accuracy above 95%. After catalytic aeration, residual H2O2 averaged 0.920 ppm, and all measurements were ≤ 1.0 ppm under the tested conditions. Sensor-feedback control reached the target condition in approximately 9 s, with intra-chamber concentration variation within ±3%. These results indicate that integrating contactless donning with VHP-based decontamination can improve workflow speed and repeatability while reducing direct hand-glove contact. However, the present findings represent prototype-level evidence obtained under controlled laboratory conditions. Further studies are required to validate performance under broader microbial loads, extended durability cycles, real-user variability, and clinically realistic environments.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Min et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: