Improving visualization of the cervix during pelvic exams: A simulation using a physical model of the speculum and human vagina as a steppingstone to reducing disparities in gynecological cancers.
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2023
2023
Historique:
received:
19
07
2022
accepted:
02
03
2023
medline:
28
9
2023
pubmed:
26
9
2023
entrez:
26
9
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Pelvic exams are frequently complicated by collapse of the lateral vaginal walls, obstructing the view of the cervix. To overcome this, physicians frequently repurpose a glove or a condom as a sheath placed over the speculum blades to retract the lateral vaginal walls. Despite their regular use in clinical practice, little research has been done comparing the relative efficacy of these methods. Better visualization of the cervix can benefit patients by decreasing examination-related discomfort, improving cancer screening accuracy, and preventing the need to move the examination to the operating room under general anesthesia. This study presents a physical model that simulates vaginal pressure being exerted around a speculum. Using it, we conduct controlled experiments comparing the efficacy of different condom types, glove materials, glove sizes, and techniques to place gloves on the speculum. The results show that the best sheath is the middle finger of nitrile-material gloves. They provide adequate lateral wall retraction without significantly restricting the opening of the speculum. In comparison, condoms provide a smaller amount of retraction due to loosely fitting the speculum. They may still be a reasonable option for a different speculum size. However, vinyl-material gloves are an impractical option for sheaths; they greatly restrict speculum opening, occasionally even breaking the speculum, which overcome its retraction benefits. Glove size, condom brand, and condom material (latex vs polyisoprene) had minimal impact. This study serves as a guide for clinicians as they use easily accessible tools to perform difficult pelvic exams. We recommend that physicians consider nitrile gloves as the preferred option for a sheath around a speculum. Additionally, this study demonstrates proof-of-concept of a physical model that quantitatively describes different materials on their ability to improve cervical access. This model can be used in future research with more speculum and material combinations, including with materials custom-designed for vaginal retraction.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37751425
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0283145
pii: PONE-D-22-20240
pmc: PMC10522035
doi:
Substances chimiques
Nitriles
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0283145Informations de copyright
Copyright: © 2023 Yerrabelli et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
Obesity (Silver Spring). 2009 Feb;17(2):375-81
pubmed: 18997682
Arch Public Health. 2021 Aug 30;79(1):155
pubmed: 34462004
Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2014 May;125(2):116-20
pubmed: 24565103
Int J Obes (Lond). 2006 Jan;30(1):147-55
pubmed: 16231037
Prev Med. 2022 Jun;159:107072
pubmed: 35460722
Women Health. 1993;20(2):45-57
pubmed: 8372479
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2021 Apr;30(4):661-668
pubmed: 33514604
Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2001 Nov;41(4):379-86
pubmed: 11787909
PLoS One. 2017 May 31;12(5):e0177782
pubmed: 28562669
Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2004 Apr;44(2):140-5
pubmed: 15089838
Am J Prev Med. 2008 Aug;35(2):127-32
pubmed: 18617081
BMJ. 2018 Dec 5;363:k4823
pubmed: 30518635
Obstet Gynecol. 2009 Jan;113(1):81-88
pubmed: 19104363
J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2020 Apr;24(2):184-191
pubmed: 32243314
J Midwifery Womens Health. 2010 Jul-Aug;55(4):344-56
pubmed: 20630361
Cal West Med. 1931 Dec;35(6):451-2
pubmed: 18741979
PLoS One. 2015 Sep 02;10(9):e0135869
pubmed: 26332673
J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2006 Jun;15(5):531-41
pubmed: 16796480
Eur J Cancer. 2015 Nov;51(16):2375-85
pubmed: 26296294
N Engl J Med. 2007 Jun 28;356(26):e26
pubmed: 17596596
J Clin Oncol. 2018 Apr 20;36(12):1184-1191
pubmed: 29356609
Pelviperineology. 2019 Mar;38(1):3-11
pubmed: 31341548
Sci Rep. 2020 Oct 6;10(1):16570
pubmed: 33024146
SAGE Open Med. 2022 Dec 19;10:20503121221146069
pubmed: 36568345
Cytojournal. 2022 Mar 29;19:24
pubmed: 35510105
Can Fam Physician. 2018 Apr;64(4):297-298
pubmed: 29650609
Can J Public Health. 2013 Feb 11;104(2):e159-66
pubmed: 23618210
Prev Med. 2020 Aug;137:106119
pubmed: 32387298
BJOG. 2019 Jun;126(7):891-899
pubmed: 30801889
NCHS Data Brief. 2019 Jun;(339):1-8
pubmed: 31442190
CA Cancer J Clin. 2020 Sep;70(5):321-346
pubmed: 32729638
J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2015 Jan;19(1):55-61
pubmed: 24769651
J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2017 Apr;21(2):161
pubmed: 28157823
JAMA. 2018 Aug 21;320(7):674-686
pubmed: 30140884
Cancer Cytopathol. 2014 Mar;122(3):221-6
pubmed: 24254917
Sex Med. 2018 Mar;6(1):39-48
pubmed: 29273316
J Gen Intern Med. 2011 Jun;26(6):651-7
pubmed: 21225474
J Forensic Leg Med. 2013 May;20(4):207-10
pubmed: 23622460
Obesity (Silver Spring). 2010 Jun;18(6):1153-9
pubmed: 20019676
Cancers (Basel). 2021 Apr 01;13(7):
pubmed: 33915878
BMJ. 2014 Sep 16;349:g5264
pubmed: 25232064
J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2017 Jan;21(1):67-72
pubmed: 27824787