Anyone heard any reason gel polish is worse than regular polish??

klone, MSN, RN · Mar 1, 2015

I don't like rules created on a whim and without actual reasons..

I'm that way, too.

I can totally understand if a facility policy is "no polish, period." But to say yes to polish, but no to GEL polish is arbitrary and capricious, not to mention not backed by any evidence that I'm aware of. That is what annoys me about it.

Editorial Team / Admin · Mar 1, 2015

My department's policy is no polish over 4 days old/no chips. Right there, that probably eliminates gel manicures for most people because the whole intent of them is to last longer. Personally, I think that nail polish as a whole should be eliminated- regular/gel/artificial nail, it's probably all a risk for infection, plus how do people get it to last with the insane amount of hand washing nurses and all health care professionals are supposed to be doing?

trinitymaster · Mar 1, 2015

Despite my google searches, I found nothing written about gel polish and infection control.

Ah yes, EBGS (Evidence Based Google Searches). Your instructors would be proud.

trinitymaster · Mar 2, 2015

Here is what you need to understand. Fingernails are notorious spreaders of bacteria which is why most facilities have a policy on how long they can be. It is also why many facilities have a policy about painted nails. Chipped nails harbor bacteria. For the sake of your patients, you should have clean, well-manicured nails without polish.

Yes :no: , we are totally jealous of how beautiful your fingernails are. Yes :no: , we are petty and vindictive. Whatever you think of "Senior" staff is fine with us. Just show a little professionalism, quit being a C-diff Sally, and come to work with $15 nails instead of $50 nails.

schnookimz · Mar 2, 2015

I love how everyone against gel polish is continuing to say how bad it is, but no one has come up with a published study to back up that opinion.

klone, MSN, RN · Mar 2, 2015

Ah yes, EBGS (Evidence Based Google Searches). Your instructors would be proud.

What's wrong with Google Scholar?

You do realize that research studies are searchable via google, right?

ShelbyaStar · Mar 2, 2015

It is what it is. I doubt there are studies; in fact I hope there aren't because it would be a waste of grant money. I think it depends more on whether you consider gel polish to be more like regular or more like fake nails. Technically, it is basically painting on a fake nail, fake nails harbor more bacteria, therefore gel is out.

I don't really like rules added on willy nilly either but this makes a fair bit of sense. Be glad you can have nail polish at all and be on your merry way. Infection control aside, it's also a professionalism thing to not have crazy colors of nail polish- facial piercings don't really pose an infection risk, nor do tattoos, but those are usually frowned upon anyway.

My policy is nude nail polish is okay. This seems silly to me as surely nude polish spreads just as many germs as red or tiger stripes. Just goes to show you it's as much about professionalism as anything.

klone, MSN, RN · Mar 2, 2015

I doubt there are studies; in fact I hope there aren't because it would be a waste of grant money.

Not all studies require grant money.

I think it depends more on whether you consider gel polish to be more like regular or more like fake nails. Technically, it is basically painting on a fake nail, fake nails harbor more bacteria, therefore gel is out.

No, technically it's not "painting on a fake nail". It's a nail polish that has a chemical in it that "cures" under UV lights. It is nothing like a fake nail. It's like regular nail polish, but it doesn't chip as easily (therefore, it's probably less likely to harbor bacteria).

Libby1987 · Mar 2, 2015

Not all studies require grant money.
No, technically it's not "painting on a fake nail". It's a nail polish that has a chemical in it that "cures" under UV lights. It is nothing like a fake nail. It's like regular nail polish, but it doesn't chip as easily (therefore, it's probably less likely to harbor bacteria).

With my last set of gel nails she added something to the nails because they were becoming thin. They fell off completely intact and had to be glued back on just like fake nails.

And the edges lifted at some point just like a veneer.

Sounds like yours are better quality and better maintained but I bet that isn't true with everyone.

klone, MSN, RN · Mar 2, 2015

I don't have gel nails. I've just seen them, and watched them applied, and have applied them myself, and there is so little difference between gel polish and regular polish (other than gel polish lasting a lot longer, due to whatever chemistry magic that takes place). It's just a totally non-evidence based nonsensical policy that I rail against.

Libby1987 · Mar 2, 2015

I had them for several months last year, applied at a salon. They're beautiful for the 1st week, then start to deteriorate by end of the 2nd week, with all of the washing and abuse I imagine.

The first week they look like beautifully perfect painted nails, by the end of the second they're starting to look like fake nails.

My gal also cleaned houses and her would get pretty ratty looking with the lifting.

I can see why they would be lumped with acrylics but have no evidence for it.

montinurse, BSN · Mar 2, 2015

I like that someone is asking this. I've often wondered about the EB behind the gel rule. Frankly, I don't feel like getting my nails pretty to go work in ER or ICU, but I wonder about them actually harboring bacteria. My nails feel more strong and healthy WITH the gel polish.