BACKGROUND: The widespread distribution of female condoms (FCs) in developing countries has been hindered by high unit cost, making new less expensive devices a priority for donor agencies. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized, crossover study assessing product preference, safety, acceptability and function of three new FCs (PATH Woman's Condom, FC2 and V-Amour) among 170 women in Durban, South Africa. A subsequent "simulated market" study provided participants with free choice of FCs and assessed condom uptake over 3 months. RESULTS: Of the 160 women who used at least one FC of each type, 47.5% preferred the PATH Woman's Condom (WC), 35.6% preferred FC2 and 16.3% preferred V-Amour (p<.001). Women rated the WC better than FC2 and V-Amour for appearance, ease of use and overall fit and better than V-Amour for feel. WC was rated worse than FC2 and V-Amour for lubrication volume. The simulated market demonstrated similar preferences. Total clinical failure rates (i.e., the types of failures that could result in pregnancy or STI) were low (<4%), regardless of condom type. CONCLUSIONS: Three new FC types functioned similarly and were generally acceptable. Most participants preferred WC and FC2 over V-Amour, and WC was preferred over FC2 in several acceptability measures.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: The widespread distribution of female condoms (FCs) in developing countries has been hindered by high unit cost, making new less expensive devices a priority for donor agencies. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized, crossover study assessing product preference, safety, acceptability and function of three new FCs (PATH Woman's Condom, FC2 and V-Amour) among 170 women in Durban, South Africa. A subsequent "simulated market" study provided participants with free choice of FCs and assessed condom uptake over 3 months. RESULTS: Of the 160 women who used at least one FC of each type, 47.5% preferred the PATH Woman's Condom (WC), 35.6% preferred FC2 and 16.3% preferred V-Amour (p<.001). Women rated the WC better than FC2 and V-Amour for appearance, ease of use and overall fit and better than V-Amour for feel. WC was rated worse than FC2 and V-Amour for lubrication volume. The simulated market demonstrated similar preferences. Total clinical failure rates (i.e., the types of failures that could result in pregnancy or STI) were low (<4%), regardless of condom type. CONCLUSIONS: Three new FC types functioned similarly and were generally acceptable. Most participants preferred WC and FC2 over V-Amour, and WC was preferred over FC2 in several acceptability measures.
Authors: Lindsay F Kramzer; Jessica Cohen; Jesse Schubert; Charlene S Dezzutti; Bernard J Moncla; David Friend; Lisa C Rohan Journal: Contraception Date: 2015-05-19 Impact factor: 3.375
Authors: Tsitsi B Masvawure; Joanne E Mantell; Zonke Mabude; Claudia Ngoloyi; Cecilia Milford; Mags Beksinska; Jennifer A Smit Journal: J Sex Res Date: 2013-09-20
Authors: Beatrice A Chen; Diana L Blithe; Gitonga R Muraguri; Audrey A Lance; Bruce R Carr; Jeffrey T Jensen; Thomas D Kimble; Amitasrigowri S Murthy; Courtney A Schreiber; Michael A Thomas; Terri L Walsh; Carolyn Westhoff; Anne E Burke Journal: Contraception Date: 2019-03-06 Impact factor: 3.375
Authors: Sten H Vermund; José A Tique; Holly M Cassell; Megan E Pask; Philip J Ciampa; Carolyn M Audet Journal: J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Date: 2013-06-01 Impact factor: 3.731
Authors: Amon Exavery; Godfrey M Mubyazi; Jovitha Rugemalila; Adiel K Mushi; Julius J Massaga; Hamisi M Malebo; Filemon Tenu; Joyce K Ikingura; Sia Malekia; Emmanuel A Makundi; Acleus Sm Ruta; John W Ogondiek; Victor Wiketye; Mwelecele N Malecela Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2012-07-29 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Ramadimetja Mogale; Fhumulani M Mulaudzi; Mmapheko D Peu; Mamakwa S Mataboge; Roinah Ngunyulu; Salaminah S Phiri Journal: Afr J Prim Health Care Fam Med Date: 2016-05-31