In the art there have been several methods of insertion of internally-applied catamenial tampons. One type which is on the market comprises a compressed round-nosed tampon having an inserter stick removably seated and frictionally held in a socket disposed in the rear portion of the tampon. Another type comprises a tube that houses the tampon pledget. The tube is inserted in the vagina, and the tampon is ejected from the tube. A third type of tampon utilizes a round-nosed tampon that is digitally inserted into the vagina. U.S. Pat. No. 3,765,417--Crockford illustrates a tube-type applicator for tampons. U.S. Pat. No. 3,983,875--Truman illustrates a stick-type applicator for tampons. In U.S. Pat. No. Des. 263,503--Williams, a tampon applicator having a scoop-shaped holding means on the end has been proposed.
There have been disadvantages to previous methods of tampon insertion. Digital insertion of tampons has been considered undesirable by many as their fingers may become soiled, and it may not be hygienically satisfactory. Tube-type applicators, while generally satisfactory, have the disadvantage that the tubes are of relatively complicated construction and add significantly to the cost of the tampons. Further, there may be pinching of tissue within the vagina involved in the ejection of the tampon and withdrawal of the tampon tube. A disadvantage of stick-type applicators with the stick in a hole within the rear of the tampon is that the tampons are required to be quite hard and rigid. Such tampons may not expand rapidly enough to prevent leakage around the tampon prior to its softening and becoming fully effective. Tube-type applicators allow use of softer tampons. Digitally-inserted tampons also are required to be somewhat harder than tube-type tampons.
There is a need for a tampon that has the simplicity, hygienic properties and low cost of the stick applicator tampon or digital tampon without the necessity for the hard tampon.
USPTO Backgrounds
USPTO Backgrounds