Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 1 de 1
Filtrar
Más filtros










Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Obstet Gynecol ; 87(1): 27-9, 1996 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-8532260

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of commercially available probe covers with less expensive condoms. METHODS: During a 10-month period, sonographers performed endovaginal ultrasound examinations on patients by randomly testing either commercially available probe covers or condoms on the vaginal probe. After use, the sheaths were tested for damage by filling them with water to observe for leakage and thereby determine the breakage rate. RESULTS: Perforations were noted in 15 of 180 probe covers and three of 180 condoms (8.3 versus 1.7%, P < .05; relative risk [RR] 5.4, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.4-18.5). Potential contamination of the endovaginal probe occurred during nine of 174 examinations and one of 178 examinations in which probe covers and condoms, respectively, were used (P < .05; RR 9.7, 95% CI 1.2-67.7). CONCLUSION: Condoms are less expensive and superior to commercially available probe covers for covering the ultrasound probe during endovaginal examinations.


Asunto(s)
Enfermedades de los Genitales Femeninos/diagnóstico por imagen , Adolescente , Adulto , Condones , Femenino , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Prospectivos , Riesgo , Ultrasonografía/instrumentación , Ultrasonografía/métodos , Vagina
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA