首页> 外文OA文献 >A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind Study of Vaginal Microflora and Epithelium in Women Using a Tampon with an Apertured Film Cover Compared with Those in Women Using a Commercial Tampon with a Cover of Nonwoven Fleece▿
【2h】

A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind Study of Vaginal Microflora and Epithelium in Women Using a Tampon with an Apertured Film Cover Compared with Those in Women Using a Commercial Tampon with a Cover of Nonwoven Fleece▿

机译:与使用商业卫生棉条覆盖无纺布羊毛的妇女相比,使用有孔薄膜覆盖卫生棉条的妇女阴道微生物区系和上皮的前瞻性,随机,双盲研究▿

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Healthy women with normal menstrual cycles were randomly assigned to use either a test tampon during cycle 1 and a reference tampon during cycle 2 or a reference tampon during cycle 1 and a test tampon during cycle 2. Tampons were identical except for their cover materials: apertured film for the test tampon and nonwoven fleece for the reference tampon. Product use was doubly blinded. Qualitative and quantitative analyses of vaginal cultures were done pre-, mid-, and postmenstrually for a broad panel of microorganisms, colposcopy was performed, and diary reports were collected; 101 of 105 enrolled subjects completed the study. Midmenstrual findings for a variety of organisms differed from pre- and postmenstrual observations whether subjects were using test or reference tampons. No statistically significant differences were noted in prevalence or colony counts at premenstrual versus mid- and postmenstrual visits for most microorganisms. Prevalences of Gardnerella and anaerobic gram-negative rods were significantly different between tampons at the premenstrual visit, when unusually low values were observed for the test and reference tampons, respectively. None of the changes or differences in microflora were considered to be clinically significant. It is noteworthy, however, that declines in the prevalence and abundance of Lactobacillus during the menstrual periods were less pronounced during the use of both test and reference tampons than those reported from previous studies. Colposcopy showed no abnormal findings with either tampon and no changes in vaginal or cervical epithelial integrity. Thus, all evidence from both microbiological and colposcopic evaluations indicates that the apertured film cover of the test tampon is as safe as the nonwoven cover of the reference tampon.
机译:月经周期正常的健康女性被随机分配为在第1周期使用测试棉塞,在第2周期使用参考棉塞,在第1周期使用参考棉塞,在第2周期使用测试棉塞。用于测试棉塞的薄膜和用于参考棉塞的无纺布。产品的使用是双盲的。经阴道前,中期和后对各种微生物进行阴道培养物的定性和定量分析,进行阴道镜检查,并收集日记报告。在105名登记的受试者中,有101名完成了研究。各种生物的月经中期发现与月经前后的观察结果有所不同,无论受试者使用的是测试棉塞还是标准的卫生棉条。对于大多数微生物,在经期前与经中期及经期访视之间的患病率或菌落数均无统计学差异。在月经来潮时,卫生棉条和厌氧革兰氏阴性棒的发生率在卫生棉条之间存在显着差异,而在测试卫生棉条和参考卫生棉条中观察到的数值异常低时。菌群的变化或差异均未被认为具有临床意义。然而,值得注意的是,在使用测试棉塞和参考棉塞的同时,月经期乳酸菌的流行和丰度的下降并不如以前的研究报告的那么明显。阴道镜检查未见有棉塞的异常发现,阴道或宫颈上皮完整性无变化。因此,来自微生物学和阴道镜评估的所有证据表明,测试棉塞的有孔薄膜覆盖层与参考棉塞的无纺布覆盖层一样安全。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号