The Indian Journal of Pediatrics

, Volume 70, Issue 11, pp 879–881

Disposable diapers : A hygienic alternative

Special Ariticle

Abstract

The use of disposable diapers has offered improved health care benefits. Urine and fecal matter leakage from the cloth nappies and the hand —to —mouth behavior in infants leads to many illnesses with a feco-oral mode of transmission. Also, the tender skin of the infant is more prone to nappy rash. The modern age disposable diapers, when compared to cloth nappy, have displayed a superior ability in containment of urine and feces, thereby reducing contamination and transmission of infection. Also disposable diapers contain Super Absorbent Material (SAM) that successfully reduces the incidence of nappy rash.

Key words

Fecal contamination Disposable diaper Nappy rash Super Absorbent Material (SAM) 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Morrow AL, Townsend IT, Pickering LK. Risk of Enteric Infection Associated with Child Day Care.Pediatr Annals 1991; 20:8.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kim K, Du Pont HL, Pickering LK. Outbreaks of diarrhea associated with Clostrdium difficile and its toxins in day-care centers: evidence of person to person spread.J Pediatr 1983; 102:376–382.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Pickering LK, Evans DG, Du Pont HL, Vollet JJ, Evans DJ. Diarrhea caused by Shigella, Rotavirus and Giardia in day care centers.J Pediatr 1981; 99:51–56.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Novotny TE, Hopkins RS, Shillam P, Janoff EN. Prevalence of Giardia lamblia and Risk Factors for Infection Among Children Attending Day-Care Facilities in Denver.Public Health Reports 1990; 105: 72.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Shapiro CN, Hadler SC. Hepatitis A and Hepatitis B Virus Infections in Day-Care.Pediatr Ann 1991; 20(8): 435–441.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wong CS, Jelacic S, Habeeb RL, Watkins SL, Tarr PI. The risk of the hemolytic-uremic syndrome after antibiotic treatment ofEscherichia coli O157: H7 infections.N Engl J Med 2000; 342(26) : 1930–1936.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Van R, Wun CC, Morrow AL, Pickering LK. The effect of diaper type and overclothing on fecal contamination in daycare centers.JAMA 1991; 265(14): 1840–1844.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mary K, Bernhardt K, William R, James D, Rae ES. Comparison of Stool Containment in Cloth and Single-Use Diapers using a Simulated Infant Feces.Pediatrics 1993; 91(3): 632–636.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jordan WE, Lawson KD, Berg RW, Franxman JJ, Marrer AM. Diaper dermatitis: frequency and severity among a general infant population.Pediatr Dermatol 1986; 3:198–207.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Marc Larregue, Paul Duriez, Pierre Vabres, Jean Maleville. Diaper Dermatitis: Topographic diagnosis and treatment guidelines. In Carlo Gelmetti, ed.Pediatric Dermatology: Controversies and Current Concepts. Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Stein H. Incidence of diaper rash when using cloth and disposable diaper.J Pediatr 1982; 101: 721–723.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Thompson ED, Seymor JL, Aardema MJ. Lack of genotoxiity of croslinked acrylate polymers in four short-term genotoxicity assays.Environ Mol Mutagen 1991; 18:184–199.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Linderschmidt RC, Stone LC, Seymour JLet al. Effects of oral administration of high-molecular-weight crosslinked polyacrylate in rats.Fundam Appl Toxicol 1991; 17:128–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lane AT, Rehder PA, Helm K. Evaluations of Diapers Containing Absorbent Gelling Material with Conventional Disposable Diapers in Newborn Infants.Am J Dis of Children 1990; 144:315.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Dr. K C Chaudhuri Foundation 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Jaslok Hospital and Research CenterMumbaiIndia

Personalised recommendations