Suppr超能文献

一种超吸收能力的月经棉条的临床安全评估。

Clinical safety assessment of an ultra absorbency menstrual tampon.

机构信息

The Procter & Gamble Company, Cincinnati, Ohio 45224, USA.

出版信息

J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2010 Feb;19(2):273-8. doi: 10.1089/jwh.2009.1423.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Menstrual tampons are available in a range of absorbencies to allow women to use the product most appropriate to their needs. This study assessed the safety of an ultra absorbency (15 g to 18 g) tampon compared with a currently marketed super-plus absorbency (12 g to 15 g) tampon as a control.

METHODS

Healthy women age 18-45 years (n = 95) were enrolled in this single-blind, crossover study. Subjects used, in random order, the experimental tampon during one menstrual cycle and the control tampon during the other. Subjects were also randomly assigned to receive either vaginal microbial assessments for determination of the presence and density of Staphylococcus aureus (n = 35) or colposcopic examinations for assessment of changes in the vaginal mucosa (n = 60). Data on comfort and acceptability of the tampons were collected by using diaries and questionnaires completed by the subjects in both groups.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight women in the microbial assessment group and 43 in the colposcopic examination group completed the study; these subjects made up the primary analysis population. No differences in isolation frequency or cell density of S. aureus or in vaginal mucosal changes were observed with the experimental tampon in comparison with the control tampon. No reported adverse events were attributed to the experimental tampon. Both tampons received positive comfort ratings.

CONCLUSIONS

Based upon microbial assessments, colposcopic examinations, adverse events, and subject reporting of comfort, the ultra absorbency tampon is similar in safety profile to the currently marketed super plus absorbency tampon.

摘要

背景

卫生棉条有不同的吸收力可供选择,以满足女性的不同需求。本研究评估了一种超高吸收力(15-18 克)卫生棉条与目前市售的超吸收力(12-15 克)卫生棉条的安全性,后者为对照。

方法

这项单盲、交叉研究纳入了 95 名年龄在 18-45 岁之间的健康女性。参与者在一个月经周期内随机使用实验用卫生棉条,另一个周期使用对照用卫生棉条。此外,参与者还被随机分配进行阴道微生物评估以确定金黄色葡萄球菌的存在和密度(n=35)或阴道镜检查以评估阴道黏膜的变化(n=60)。通过参与者在两组中填写的日记和问卷收集了关于卫生棉条舒适度和可接受性的数据。

结果

在微生物评估组的 28 名女性和在阴道镜检查组的 43 名女性完成了研究;这些女性构成了主要分析人群。与对照用卫生棉条相比,实验用卫生棉条在金黄色葡萄球菌的分离频率或细胞密度或阴道黏膜变化方面没有差异。未报告与实验用卫生棉条有关的不良事件。两种卫生棉条的舒适度评分均为正面。

结论

根据微生物评估、阴道镜检查、不良事件以及参与者对舒适度的报告,超高吸收力卫生棉条在安全性方面与目前市售的超吸收力卫生棉条相似。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验