BACKGROUND: This study was conducted to compare the effectiveness of a new, single-size silicone contraceptive diaphragm used with either spermicide [2% nonoxynol-9 (N-9)] or lubricant in preventing sperm from penetrating midcycle cervical mucus. STUDY DESIGN: A crossover postcoital test (PCT) in healthy, sexually active women not at risk for pregnancy due to tubal occlusion was conducted. Couples had a baseline PCT without a device to verify normal fertility parameters. Qualified couples underwent up to two test cycles using the SILCS diaphragm with a metal spring. A subgroup of couples underwent a third test cycle with the SILCS polymer spring diaphragm used with N-9 gel. RESULTS:Fifteen couples completed a baseline cycle and were randomized to order of study gel. Of these, 14 couples completed a baseline cycle and at least one test cycle, 12 couples completed a baseline cycle and two test cycles and 8 couples completed a third test cycle with the polymer spring prototype. Sperm was detected in the vaginal pool in all completed test cycles. The SILCS metal spring diaphragms used with N-9 gel reduced the average number of progressively motile sperm per high power field in the cervical mucus from a baseline of 12.5 to 0, while use of this device with lubricant reduced the number to 0.5. The SILCS polymer spring diaphragm used with N-9 performed the same as the metal spring used with N-9. CONCLUSION: The SILCS diaphragm used with N-9 gel performed well. It is likely that the SILCS diaphragm will give acceptable results in a contraceptive effectiveness study but that adjunctive use of a chemical barrier such as N-9 gel will be necessary for it to be most effective.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: This study was conducted to compare the effectiveness of a new, single-size silicone contraceptive diaphragm used with either spermicide [2% nonoxynol-9 (N-9)] or lubricant in preventing sperm from penetrating midcycle cervical mucus. STUDY DESIGN: A crossover postcoital test (PCT) in healthy, sexually active women not at risk for pregnancy due to tubal occlusion was conducted. Couples had a baseline PCT without a device to verify normal fertility parameters. Qualified couples underwent up to two test cycles using the SILCS diaphragm with a metal spring. A subgroup of couples underwent a third test cycle with the SILCS polymer spring diaphragm used with N-9 gel. RESULTS: Fifteen couples completed a baseline cycle and were randomized to order of study gel. Of these, 14 couples completed a baseline cycle and at least one test cycle, 12 couples completed a baseline cycle and two test cycles and 8 couples completed a third test cycle with the polymer spring prototype. Sperm was detected in the vaginal pool in all completed test cycles. The SILCS metal spring diaphragms used with N-9 gel reduced the average number of progressively motile sperm per high power field in the cervical mucus from a baseline of 12.5 to 0, while use of this device with lubricant reduced the number to 0.5. The SILCS polymer spring diaphragm used with N-9 performed the same as the metal spring used with N-9. CONCLUSION: The SILCS diaphragm used with N-9 gel performed well. It is likely that the SILCS diaphragm will give acceptable results in a contraceptive effectiveness study but that adjunctive use of a chemical barrier such as N-9 gel will be necessary for it to be most effective.
Authors: Sara Pentlicky; Mark Rosen; Patricia S Coffey; M Kilbourne-Brook; A Shaunik; Courtney A Schreiber; Kurt Barnhart Journal: Contraception Date: 2012-08-13 Impact factor: 3.375
Authors: Margaret C Snead; Johan H Melendez; Athena P Kourtis; Dorothy M Chaney; Teresa M Brown; Carolyn M Black; Christine K Mauck; Jill L Schwartz; Jonathan M Zenilman; Denise J Jamieson; Maurizio Macaluso; Gustavo F Doncel Journal: Contraception Date: 2013-11-12 Impact factor: 3.375
Authors: Margaret C Snead; Athena P Kourtis; Carolyn M Black; Christine K Mauck; Teresa M Brown; Ana Penman-Aguilar; Johan H Melendez; Maria F Gallo; Denise J Jamieson; Maurizio Macaluso Journal: Contraception Date: 2012-12-04 Impact factor: 3.375
Authors: Fern Terris-Prestholt; Kara Hanson; Catherine MacPhail; Peter Vickerman; Helen Rees; Charlotte Watts Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-12-30 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Deborah J Anderson; Joseph A Politch; Richard A Cone; Larry Zeitlin; Samuel K Lai; Philip J Santangelo; Thomas R Moench; Kevin J Whaley Journal: Biol Reprod Date: 2020-08-04 Impact factor: 4.161