Mouthwash use and associated head and neck cancer risk

Data sources: All studies with questionnaire items on mouthwash use in the International Head and Neck Cancer Epidemiology Consortium (INHANCE). Data extraction and synthesis: Pooled analysis data from case controlled studies using Individual Patient Data (IPD) meta-analysis methods. Logistic regression was used to assess the association of mouthwash use with cancers of the oral cavity, oropharynx, hypopharynx and larynx, adjusting for study, age, sex, pack-years of tobacco smoking, number of alcoholic drinks/day and education. Results: Eight thousand, nine hundred and eighty-one cases of head and neck cancer and 10,090 controls from 12 case-control studies with comparable information on mouthwash use were included in the analysis. Compared with never users of mouthwash, the odds ratio (OR) of all head and neck cancers was 1.01 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.94-1.08] for ever users, based on 12 studies. The corresponding ORs of cancer of the oral cavity and oropharynx were 1.11 (95% CI: 1.00-1.23) and 1.28 (95% CI: 1.06-1.56), respectively. Conclusions: Although limited by the retrospective nature of the study and the limited ability to assess risks of mouthwash use in nonusers of tobacco and alcohol, this large investigation shows potential risks for head and neck cancer subsites and in long-term and frequent users of mouthwash

The benefits of latex-free gloves in the operating room environment.

Sterile protective gloves are used to reduce the risk of infection for patients and clinicians in all healthcare settings. This is particularly important in operating theatres, where surgical site infection is a common and serious complication for perioperative patients. These gloves have traditionally been made from natural rubber latex and dusted with cornstarch powder. However, frequent use of latex gloves can lead to a hypersensitivity or allergy to latex. A latex allergy causes discomfort and inconvenience, and it may reduce productivity, impose significant financial burdens and even be life threatening. There has not been sufficient evidence to ban the clinical use of latex; however, in cases of suspected latex allergy, guidelines recommend the use of either latex-free gloves or powder-free, low-protein latex gloves. The use of these alternative gloves has typically been limited to cases of allergy, because they have previously been associated with reduced dexterity and durability compared with latex gloves. This article presents four case studies, in which health professionals in a perioperative setting compare the advantages and disadvantages of using traditional latex surgical gloves with those of latex-free gloves manufactured by Cardinal Health. The findings of these case studies suggest that these latex-free gloves are equal to latex gloves in terms of establishing asepsis and providing comfort and dexterity to the wearer, without presenting the risk of developing latex sensitivity and/or allergy