Development of Ultrasound Gel from Cassava Starch for Radiological Technology Students at Kanchanabhishek Institute of Medical and Public Health Technology

Abstract

Cassava is an easily obtainable and affordable food crop in Thailand. It has low amylose and high amylopectin content, resulting in low retrogradation tendency. It is transparent and easily gelatinized at low temperature. The researchers are interested in formulating this gel for use in the Radiological Technology Program, Kanchanabhishek Institute of Medical and Public Health Technology. This research is a Research and Development (R&D) project, aiming to develop an ultrasound gel made from cassava starch and to compare satisfaction between using the regular formula and the cassava starch formula. Samples are 60 radiological technology students. Data were collect by developing cassava ultrasound gel based on new formula, then inviting experts to evaluate the characteristics of the cassava ultrasound gel. Subsequently, sample participants were asked to use both formular to evaluate their satisfaction after applying and removing the gel. The data is analyzed using content analysis and measuring satisfaction level by using mean and standard deviation (S.D.). The study findings indicate that cassava ultrasound gel has characteristics of being a clear gel with a consistent texture, minimal air bubbles, no unpleasant smell, and good adhesion to the skin. The evaluation of cassava ultrasound gel characteristics by experts found that the ultrasound gel in terms of the amount of air bubbles, image quality, pH value, and stability of color and smell passed the criteria. However, viscosity and the stability of transparency and viscosity did not pass the criteria. Furthermore, the user satisfaction results after using a cassava ultrasound gel revealed that the average satisfaction level among the participants was at the highest level (Mean = 4.50). When comparing user satisfaction between cassava ultrasound gel and the regular formula using a paired t-test, significant differences were not found in terms of skin safety and smell characteristics (p > .05). However, there’s statistically significant difference in terms of cleaning difficulty (p ≤ .05)