ADOLESCR”TBODY 2”AGE DU:SWC PSEGNANCY. Y&o Ilacauhashi, M.D.. Marianne E. Felice. M.D.. Dorothy 8. NollinQsaorth. U.D.. Depts. of Pediatrics and &productive biedicine, UniversiLy of Calitornia San Diego School of Nedicine and Hadical Center. San Diego, CA. Little is knwn about body imaQe in preQaoney either in adulee or adoleeThe thim study-van LO determine whether pregnant tee”a&cr~ cents. have different body percaptiona than their “we= preSuant peers. Twenty-save” thitd-tr,mea,xr pregnant girls (PGI from a U”i”ersiLy Teen 00 Clinic were matched by age. rate and secioeeonomic status to 27 nevat p=eQ“ant pirls (NPG) seen in a dnivemity General Adoleecsnt WedLsine Clinic. Tbe of 41% Wispanic. mean age of both ra~bfects was 16.1 yesrr t 1.0 and cdnsisted 33I Qlack, 192 Uh>.te. and 72 Ocher. Subjews were given the Tennessee SClf Concept Scale (ISCS). and self-addnleeared [email protected]
ConSiSting of 100 self-descriptive ,~taeewnto which are divided into 9 sub-scales. Although the werall Self Esteem ?osiCivity stora~) were not statistically siQnificant between the two Qroups. ehere were differences on [email protected]
subscales. Pb”sical Self Self Overall Identfty criticism Self Self Esteem 30.0 t 6.0 71.3 f 8.3 125.3 f 9.5 PC 334.1 t 27.5 60.3 f 9.9 117.2 r16.7 33.6 t 6.6 MPG 317.2 t 42.6 c. 63 CO§ P CO1 N.S There were no differences between groups in substales related to Social ‘elf. natal Self, Personal Self, family Self. and Self Behavior. Conclusion: PreQ”a”t girls ui?rewrc likely than "ever pregnant @IS to have a By)r‘e positive body im;,Se and sure self-identiry. but appeared limited in their capaeicy for re1r CIiLiCI(I1,
Rhinoprobem ecraper versus swab: an eEflcacy campahlson study of sampling technique8 to detect Chlamvdia trschomsrls cerriciVincent R. Mason. H.D.. Marianne E. Felice, M.D.. Alfred., Ja1owayski.Ph.D.. Qaebara l’uryear,M.E.A..L~T. Pramila Walplta. Ph.D. and James D. Connor, M.D.. University of California Sen Diego Medical hnter and School of Wedicine. San Diego, CA. We canpared the effitaey of two eaaFlinQ techniques far rollecclng C~TYIcal specieiens far the detection of Chlemvdia trachomatie by an Imunofluarrscence (IF) athod. Paired aanples were collectedira specially adapted plastic curette (Rhinoprobe) alang with B routine swab from 149 sexually active. females (P 16.4.prs.1 seen in an adolescent nedlcine clinic. We hyporhcaizcd that iince chlamydia is an intracellular organism. the [email protected]
should yield a higher sensitivity value because of better pmtureeent of epithelial cells. All the spcclmens ~ece proceesed. for Cblanvdia trachomatis by the dirxt IF nethod. Specimens were also cultured for chlaeyhieusingtanycin treated McCoy cells. Nineteen (19) of the one hndred forty nine (149) patients, or 12.8% were cervical cultuze positive for hlamydia trachonatis.
Sensitivity Specificity Pos.predictive AeQ.predicfive
QRINOPROBERESULTS x 99’& value 92:9% 96.3% value
The sensitivity values for both methods were higher than previous studies would auggeet. Although there rae mo statistical difference between the two siunplinQ techniques (p N.S.). we reeonnend further evaluation of the Rhinoprobe method since this technique results in the procurement of large numbers of cut&da1 epitheliel tells with less OUCOUBand hence easier visuellanrion end specieen reading& Furthermore, the Rhinoprobe method has low patient risk. with no discomfort ar bleeding.