Xuemin Wang, Sato Noriko, Chao Yuan, Na Liu, Fujimura Tsutomu, Takagi Yutaka, Nojiri Hirosh, Kitahara Takashi, Takema Yoshinori
Shanghai Skin Disease Hospital, Skin & Cosmetic Research Department, Shanghai, China.
Cutan Ocul Toxicol. 2011 Sep;30(3):212-6. doi: 10.3109/15569527.2010.547542. Epub 2011 Jan 17.
Regional differences in practices, ethnicity, and climate may influence the skin compatibility of sanitary pads. Although several clinical trials have been performed in North America, Mexico, Western Europe, Eastern Europe, and Africa, there is no clinical study reported for Asia.
The purpose of this study was to examine the skin compatibility of two types of modern sanitary pads in Chinese women along with a dermatological assessment and their satisfaction and preference.
The self-feeling and safety of a new sanitary pad with a non-woven top specially-shaped surface sheet was tested and compared with a conventional sanitary pad with a perforated film top sheet. The subjects studied were 22 Chinese women (age: 20-50 years) with a history of mild and occasional sanitary pad dermatitis residing in Shanghai. One subject wished to discontinue the trial for personal reasons, thus 21 subjects completed the trial. These subjects were randomly assigned to two types of sanitary pads, and used one type during their next menstrual period, and another type during their following menstrual period. After each menstrual period, a dermatologist examined the objective and subjective skin symptoms and determined a score. The subjects were asked to rate their level of satisfaction with respect to overall usability, softness, stickiness, dryness, and absorbency, and to choose which pad they had preferred.
No adverse effect was observed for either type of pad. Edema, erythema, burning, and stinging were not obvious symptoms for either type of pad. For itching, 30-65% of the subjects scored slight or mild for both types of pads. A comprehensive evaluation showed that several symptoms were observed on both type of pads at slight and mild levels, but minimal and insignificant differences were found between them. The majority of subjects were highly satisfied with both types, but preferred the new sanitary pad with a non-woven specially-shaped surface top sheet for its softness and absorbency.
Our results indicate that both types of sanitary pads were tolerated well by Chinese women, thereby providing an important extension of earlier studies.
使用习惯、种族和气候方面的地区差异可能会影响卫生巾的皮肤兼容性。尽管在北美、墨西哥、西欧、东欧和非洲已经进行了多项临床试验,但尚无针对亚洲的临床研究报告。
本研究旨在通过皮肤学评估以及中国女性对两种现代卫生巾的满意度和偏好调查,来检验其皮肤兼容性。
对一种带有无纺布顶部特殊形状表层的新型卫生巾的自我感受和安全性进行测试,并与一种带有穿孔薄膜表层的传统卫生巾进行比较。研究对象为22名居住在上海、有轻度偶尔发生的卫生巾皮炎病史的中国女性(年龄:20 - 50岁)。一名受试者因个人原因希望退出试验,因此21名受试者完成了试验。这些受试者被随机分配使用两种类型的卫生巾,在下一个月经期使用一种,随后的月经期使用另一种。每个月经期后,皮肤科医生检查客观和主观皮肤症状并给出评分。受试者被要求对整体可用性、柔软度、粘性、干爽度和吸收性的满意度进行评分,并选择她们更喜欢的卫生巾类型。
两种类型的卫生巾均未观察到不良反应。水肿、红斑、灼烧和刺痛对两种类型的卫生巾来说都不是明显症状。对于瘙痒,两种类型的卫生巾有30 - 65%的受试者评分为轻微或轻度。综合评估显示,两种类型的卫生巾在轻微和轻度水平上都观察到了几种症状,但它们之间的差异极小且不显著。大多数受试者对两种类型都非常满意,但由于其柔软度和吸收性,更喜欢带有无纺布特殊形状表层的新型卫生巾。
我们的结果表明,中国女性对两种类型的卫生巾耐受性都很好,从而为早期研究提供了重要的扩展。