Analysis of the Research Article pH Effects on the Bio-Permeability of Polymers Used in Prophylactics - Essay Example

Critical Paper The research article, “pH Effects on the Bio-Permeability of Polymers Used in Prophylactics” is an article fromAmerican journal of Biomedical Sciences authored by eight researchers. This article presents an experiment in which investigators studied the effect of pH on the Natural Rubber Latex (NRL) which is most used as a barrier material because of its tensile strength and effectiveness in preventing transmission of a number of infectious agents. Researchers optimized the use of bacteriophage and PCR detection to accomplish this study. They concluded that exposure of NRL to acidic pH ranges of physiological significance resulted into a high frequency of condom failure. The hypothesis in this study was that pH has effect on bio-permeability of NLR condoms hence research question is: Does pH increase the permeability of NLR condoms to infectious agents? In order to get answer to the research question, this study tested pH effects on permeability of natural latex rubber thus pH is an independent variable while permeability of NLR is dependent variable. The investigators exercised adequate control of the variables. The NLR were first tested for any permeability using neutral water, bacteriophage and bacteria (E. Coli) and only those that were impermeable at the beginning of the experiment were used in the experiment. This was very important since it ensured the results that showed permeability after treating with different pH solutions were not as a result of any other factor but the pH. The second control was by cleaning the NLR condoms using distilled and neutral water. This was important because of two controls; first by ensuring all lubricants, flavors and essence are removed from the NLR condom and second there is no effect on the subsequent removal since distilled water (neutral was used) (Tubman et al 293-294). The investigators also prepared and standardized the bacteria that was used in this experiment and used the right media to inoculate and isolate the bacteria and bacteriophage. However, the investigators have not shown evidence of calibration of the pH meter that was used. Since pH is a variable, preparation of the pH solutions that were used to treat NLR condoms only is only mentioned but does not show for example how the study confirmed that pH 4.2 was actually 4.2. Moreover, replication of this study could face a challenge due to this fact. Researchers ought to have indicated not only how the NLR condoms were treated in different pH solutions, but also how the pH for the respective solutions were measured and confirmed. The investigators’ biasness was controlled by ensuring equal treatments of the samples and by using random sampling method. It is important to note that the samples that were subjected to a test by the investigator were diverse and there was no particular formula for choosing samples. However, the researcher ensured that the NLR condoms included in the study were from different manufactures. This catered for both omission and inclusive bias within this experiment and sampling. The procedural bias was also controlled by ensuring that treatments of all samples were standardized e.g. treatments of NLR condoms in pH solutions were done at standardized temperature and time regime. In this regard, there are no samples that were either subjected to more acidic, less acidic or for more/less time in pH solutions. However, in terms of measurement bias, the investigators may have not controlled measurements of pH since there is no evidence of standardizing or calibration of the pH meter used in measurements. Researchers have presented and discussed the results systematically. The researcher has first presented the results of the effect of pH on the NLR condoms followed by the effect on permeability to infectious bacteria. This is important since it helps the reader in understanding the results better. The results of this study showed that there is a 1 in 10 failure rate in condoms that were treated in acidic conditions at 260C for 120 minutes (Tubman et al, 298). The results also show that out of 21 condoms, there was one fail at a pH of 4.2 for 1 hour at 260C (296). The researchers also attributed that the relation between time and lower pH since even at the same pH of 4.2 and for twenty minutes the ration of 1 in 10 fail was evident. The results have also been explained by the researchers and why they got those particular results. As stated by Tubman et al (296), the chemical and physical stress placed on NLR condom during sexual intercourse are likely to increase with duration of sexual activity. This could be a possible explanation to the reported condom failures during sexual intercourse. Investigators in this study have also demonstrated that their results are consistent since the control samples recorded 100% efficiency. Investigations into individual brands of NLR condoms however show that different brands have no significant differences in the effects of the pH. The researchers have however correlated the results to the hypothesis and the hypothesis and how the results answer research question. The researchers have used pictures of raw data exclusively, however, they have not used tables, figures and graphs comprehensively to present the results as required in this kind of paper. Moreover this study do does not explain how results were analyzed and a conclusion reached at. Since the researchers were comparing the effects of pH on the NLR condoms, it is important to subject the differences to statistical tool to tell whether there is a significant difference. The best statistical analysis tool for treatment test like one in this experiment is analysis of variance and the t-test. It is therefore important to note that the difference in samples (control and pH treated) may not be significant after all since they were not analyzed using a statistical tool. The sample size in this study was 42 each for the control experiment and for the treatments. This is ideal sample size due to the fact that the experiment is involving and the level of accuracy that is required to get the right results. However, since this experiment involves treatment, replication of the treatments would have improved the results further. As stated by Wisdom et al (731), replication in scientific research refers to repetition of the experimental conditions in order to be able to estimate the variability that is associated with the phenomenon. Replication ensures a number of advantages including, obtaining a more accurate estimate, increase precision by reducing the experimental error, obtain a precise estimate of mean hence improve accuracy of generalization on mean effect of a treatment. The study concludes by relating the research question and hypothesis with the results of the study. Investigators have also stated clearly how the research question has been handled by the results. Researchers have also made generalization as observed in the results of their study and were specific. For instance, it is clear from their study that at pH 4.2 to NLR condoms’ permeability is increased thus there is risk of infection at this pH and has been clearly mention in the conclusion (298). Moreover, I agree with the conclusion since it gives room for further study on the same topic and challenges other researchers to conduct similar test on the effects of acid on other latex barrier materials and states how this may impact on the future manufacture and testing. Works Cited Tubman, Janice, et al. "pH Effects on the Bio-Permeability of Polymers Used in Prophylactics." American Journal Of Biomedical Sciences 3.4 (2011): 292-300 Wisdom, Jennifer P., et al. "Methodological Reporting in Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Health Services Research Articles." Health Services Research 47.2 (2012): 721-745 Read More