We have located links that may give you full text access.
Evaluation of Glucomannan Powder as an Ultrasound Transmission Gel Alternative for Resource-Constrained Environments: A Prospective, Comparative Study.
Wilderness & Environmental Medicine 2018 December
INTRODUCTION: Resource and logistical constraints may limit the availability of commercial ultrasound (US) transmission gel (USTG) in austere environments. Glucomannan powder, a dietary fiber supplement, can be mixed with tap water to form a gel that may be a field-expedient substitute for USTG. We compared glucomannan gel with a commercial USTG for US image adequacy and quality.
METHODS: A single clinician obtained 193 US video clips from 14 different examinations on live-tissue and simulation training models using both commercial and glucomannan USTGs. Four US fellowship-trained providers, blinded to type of gel used, independently reviewed the randomized US video clips. The primary outcome of US image adequacy was scored as "yes" or "no" and analyzed using Pearson χ2 analysis. The secondary outcome of image quality was rated on a 0 to 5 Likert scale and analyzed with the independent t test.
RESULTS: For US image adequacy, commercial USTG was superior to glucomannan gel (P=0.042, 95% CI: 96.5-96.6%), with commercial USTG adequate in 96.6% of images (375 of 388 "yes"), whereas glucomannan USTG was adequate in 93.5% (359 of 384 "yes") of images. For US image quality there was no statistically significant difference between the 2 USTGs (P=0.176, 95% CI: 93.4-93.5%), with commercial USTG rated at 3.4±1.0 and glucomannan gel at 3.3±1.1.
CONCLUSION: Despite a high image adequacy rate, glucomannan gel proved inferior to commercial USTG for US image adequacy but produced equivalent image quality. Glucomannan USTG may be a reasonable substitute when commercial USTG is unavailable.
METHODS: A single clinician obtained 193 US video clips from 14 different examinations on live-tissue and simulation training models using both commercial and glucomannan USTGs. Four US fellowship-trained providers, blinded to type of gel used, independently reviewed the randomized US video clips. The primary outcome of US image adequacy was scored as "yes" or "no" and analyzed using Pearson χ2 analysis. The secondary outcome of image quality was rated on a 0 to 5 Likert scale and analyzed with the independent t test.
RESULTS: For US image adequacy, commercial USTG was superior to glucomannan gel (P=0.042, 95% CI: 96.5-96.6%), with commercial USTG adequate in 96.6% of images (375 of 388 "yes"), whereas glucomannan USTG was adequate in 93.5% (359 of 384 "yes") of images. For US image quality there was no statistically significant difference between the 2 USTGs (P=0.176, 95% CI: 93.4-93.5%), with commercial USTG rated at 3.4±1.0 and glucomannan gel at 3.3±1.1.
CONCLUSION: Despite a high image adequacy rate, glucomannan gel proved inferior to commercial USTG for US image adequacy but produced equivalent image quality. Glucomannan USTG may be a reasonable substitute when commercial USTG is unavailable.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app