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

dishes, BSN, RN · Mar 2, 2015

@nola, when a manager uses the tactic of blaming complaints from one group of staff against another group of staff, I wonder what the manager's intentions are, is it to split the staff? is it to shirk the blame? An effective manager ensures policies are implemented without laying blame and provides the reasons for the policy.

BuckyBadgerRN, ASN, RN · Mar 2, 2015

Wow. Really? Why the need for polish at work at all? Solves the problem and belly achin'!

Something that has me miffed is that there were supposedly "numerous complaints" about some of us new hires' nails made to our nsg supervisor by senior staff. It became a big to-do... no acrylics, gels, shallacks, and the list went on. Paint is apparently ok. It just can not be a longer lasting gel manicure I guess. I thought the whole thing really pointed to how petty and childish some "senior staff" can be. FWIW, I have heard that acrylic nails can harbor more bacteria, so I wasn't surprised about the issue with those. But, has anyone heard any reason gel polish is worse than regular polish??

ThePrincessBride, MSN, RN, NP · Mar 2, 2015

Honestly, I prefer my nails unpolished/no gel, clipped really short. The hospital is a nasty place and do you really want all of those gross microorganisms underneath your nails?

RNsRWe, ASN, RN · Mar 2, 2015

My department's policy is no polish over 4 days old/no chips....

Ok, now how on earth can this possibly be enforced?? While I have no problem with a policy specifying what is and is not allowed regarding nails/manicures....but unless someone is paying WAY WAY too much attention to what nurses do on their time off, when they change their nail polish, etc....how can this ever be realistic?

Libby1987 · Mar 2, 2015

Being an enforceable policy hasn't really been my motivation. It's either a legit policy based on some reasoning, not significant enough to be the hill I die on or risk my security, or it's something I would take issue.

LadyFree28, BSN, LPN, RN · Mar 2, 2015

OP and others can do a search here on AN to get some info as I stated in my OP; I found one HERE on AN that has a source from the CDC; it's about 3 years old; but does have a link to the CDC:

https://allnurses.com/general-nursing-discussion/how-do-nurses-702184-page3.html

To add: I did a Google Scholar search and found a source article that may have started the "no gel polish" rule (from 2002) that has been in effect for some time; I've been working as a nurse since 2005 years and this policy is not new, at least for me:

url=http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM200009073431004][/url]

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Endemic Pseudomonas aeruginosa Infection in a Neonatal Intensive Care Unit

BACKGROUND

Nosocomial infections due to Pseudomonas aeruginosa have been well described, but the environmental reservoir of the organism varies. We conducted an epidemiologic and molecular investigation of endemic P. aeruginosa infection among infants in a neonatal intensive care unit that was associated with carriage of the organisms on the hands of health care workers.

METHODS

In August 1998, colonization or infection with P. aeruginosa was identified in six infants. Surveillance cultures for P. aeruginosa were obtained from the other 27 infants in the unit, and possible environmental reservoirs were also assessed. The hands of health care workers were inspected and cultured, and risk factors for P. aeruginosa colonization were evaluated. Isolates were analyzed for clonality by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis.

RESULTS

Surveillance cultures showed that three additional infants were colonized with P. aeruginosa. Cultures of environmental specimens were negative, but cultures of the hands of 10 of 165 health care workers (6 percent) were positive for P. aeruginosa. Increasing age (P=0.05) and a history of the use of artificial fingernails or nail wraps (P=0.03) were both risk factors for colonization of the hands. From January 1997 to August 1998, 49 infants were infected or colonized with P. aeruginosa. Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis demonstrated that 17 of these infants and 1 health care worker who had onychomycosis had the same clone. Infants who were exposed to this health care worker in August 1998 were at greater risk of having this clone than infants who were not exposed to this health care worker (odds ratio, 41.2; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.8 to 940.0; P=0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

An increased rate of infection and colonization with P. aeruginosa among infants in neonatal intensive care units should be investigated by assessing potential reservoirs, including environmental sources as well as patients and health care workers.

schnookimz · Mar 2, 2015

Why don't you do the search for them yourself?

I have. And haven't found a single study to support the point you're arguing for and that is why I refuse to agree.

schnookimz · Mar 2, 2015

OP and others can do a search here on AN to get some info as I stated in my OP; I found one HERE on AN that has a source from the CDC; it's about 3 years old; but does have a link to the CDC:
https://allnurses.com/general-nursing-discussion/how-do-nurses-702184-page3.html
To add: I did a Google Scholar search and found a source article that may have started the "no gel polish" rule (from 2002) that has been in effect for some time; I've been working as a nurse since 2005 years and this policy is not new, at least for me:
url=http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM200009073431004][/url]
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Endemic Pseudomonas aeruginosa Infection in a Neonatal Intensive Care Unit
BACKGROUND
Nosocomial infections due to Pseudomonas aeruginosa have been well described, but the environmental reservoir of the organism varies. We conducted an epidemiologic and molecular investigation of endemic P. aeruginosa infection among infants in a neonatal intensive care unit that was associated with carriage of the organisms on the hands of health care workers.
METHODS
In August 1998, colonization or infection with P. aeruginosa was identified in six infants. Surveillance cultures for P. aeruginosa were obtained from the other 27 infants in the unit, and possible environmental reservoirs were also assessed. The hands of health care workers were inspected and cultured, and risk factors for P. aeruginosa colonization were evaluated. Isolates were analyzed for clonality by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis.
RESULTS
Surveillance cultures showed that three additional infants were colonized with P. aeruginosa. Cultures of environmental specimens were negative, but cultures of the hands of 10 of 165 health care workers (6 percent) were positive for P. aeruginosa. Increasing age (P=0.05) and a history of the use of artificial fingernails or nail wraps (P=0.03) were both risk factors for colonization of the hands. From January 1997 to August 1998, 49 infants were infected or colonized with P. aeruginosa. Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis demonstrated that 17 of these infants and 1 health care worker who had onychomycosis had the same clone. Infants who were exposed to this health care worker in August 1998 were at greater risk of having this clone than infants who were not exposed to this health care worker (odds ratio, 41.2; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.8 to 940.0; P=0.006).
CONCLUSIONS
An increased rate of infection and colonization with P. aeruginosa among infants in neonatal intensive care units should be investigated by assessing potential reservoirs, including environmental sources as well as patients and health care workers.

This study was specifically about fake nails, not "no chip" polish.

nurseprnRN, BSN, RN · 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.

I have yet to find a study that finds gel POLISH harbors more bacteria than regular POLISH. It doesn't.

An historical perspective:

The prohibition against nail polish (paint, varnish) came out decades --decades-- ago because it does chip, even if you can't see it; it does harbor bacteria in a way that natural nails do not, and there were plenty of studies to demonstrate that.

Fast-forwarding to the newer technology of gel, shellac (check your spelling), extensions, and acrylic, there is no study that indicates these are LESS likely to harbor microorganisms in the small cracks, lifted edges, or margins underneath nail tips than polish. As a matter of fact, from a strictly mechanical standpoint, anyone with a modicum of critical thinking and observational skills will see that they are likely worse, as they have thicker edges in which cracks develop.

A corollary to your assertion:

As for your assertion that there are no studies that gel polish harbors more bacteria than regular polish, the obvious answer is, so what? You certainly have no studies to show it has fewer bacteria, either.

So that brings us back to the beginning: Nothing but natural nails in patient care areas, because it's an infection risk that is documented and easily avoided. How hard is that?

And yes, I have very nice plain white-tipped acrylics. But I do NOT practice nursing in an area where I am in a position to spread microorganisms to vulnerable people. If your nails are more important to you than patient safety, get a job like that, because you should not be in bedside practice.

RNsRWe, ASN, RN · Mar 2, 2015

Being an enforceable policy hasn't really been my motivation. It's either a legit policy based on some reasoning, not significant enough to be the hill I die on or risk my security, or it's something I would take issue.

Oh, I understand and completely agree. But for a policy to have any real teeth, it DOES need to be something enforceable, and a company that declares no polish may be more than four days old just seems weird to me. Four days...not three. What is it that is supposed to happen at the witching hour on Day #4? And since it's utterly unenforceable, I'd think something tangible, such as ONLY having the policy state "no chips" makes much more sense.

Can you just see a manager saying "I think your nail polish is five days old"? And the response "no, it's not". End of discussion.

I personally keep nails short, rarely if ever use polish; I'm not one to keep up on it so I imagine if I DID work at a facility that required no more than 4 days on my (clear) polish, it'd be awfully tough to remember to remove it on Day #3, that's all.

Libby1987 · Mar 2, 2015

Oh, I understand and completely agree. But for a policy to have any real teeth, it DOES need to be something enforceable, and a company that declares no polish may be more than four days old just seems weird to me. Four days...not three. What is it that is supposed to happen at the witching hour on Day #4? And since it's utterly unenforceable, I'd think something tangible, such as ONLY having the policy state "no chips" makes much more sense.
Can you just see a manager saying "I think your nail polish is five days old"? And the response "no, it's not". End of discussion.
I personally keep nails short, rarely if ever use polish; I'm not one to keep up on it so I imagine if I DID work at a facility that required no more than 4 days on my (clear) polish, it'd be awfully tough to remember to remove it on Day #3, that's all.

The sucky consequence is that we have blanket rules set because as a group nurses we don't seem to show any more adherence to guielines than any other group. Look at dress code, someone always has to push the limit and turn guidelines into absolute rules.

If everyone came with clean short natural nails or clean short impeccably and conservatively polished nails, this would be a non issue, but someone/s has to show up with an overdue gel job and here comes the hard rule.

imintrouble, BSN, RN · Mar 2, 2015

More than half the female staff where I work wear nail polish. Half of those have professional manicures.

I don't know what's gel and what's not. I don't know what's artificial and what's not.

If there's a policy about nails it's not being enforced. It probably won't ever be. Unless a customer complains.

My place of employment applauds makeup, manicures, and a super styled hairdo. It's "professional".

I think the infection control nurse wears polish. She certainly looks "professional".