Literature DB >> 7075188

The Prentif contraceptive cervical cap: a contemporary study of its clinical safety and effectiveness.

J P Koch.   

Abstract

Because they seemed to be an overlooked, underutilized, and underdeveloped means of contraception, cervical caps were offered to patients in a private gynecological practice and the first 413 acceptors were sent a detailed questionnaire about their experiences. The 371 who responded provided generous amounts of information helpful in assessing not only cap safety and effectiveness, which are dealt with herein, but also in assessing acceptability which is dealt with in the companion article that follows. With regard to safety considerations, "cervical erosion" was not found to contraindicate cap use and no other significant safety hazards were encountered, although two concerns were suggested for further evaluation. The failure rate was 8.4 per 100 women per year by the life table method. Of 25 failures, 11 were labeled method failures and 14 were labeled human failures by the respondents themselves. The role of cap dislodgement as a cause of method failures is analyzed. It is concluded that caps are as safe and effective as diaphragms and that for many women they are the most suitable form of contraception available. It is reasonable to expect that they will soon be able to be approved for general use.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Americas; Barrier Methods; Cancer; Cervical Cancer; Cervical Cap--complications; Cervical Cap--contraindications; Cervical Cap--side effects; Cervical Laceration; Clinical Research; Contraception; Contraceptive Effectiveness; Contraceptive Methods--complications; Contraceptive Methods--contraindications; Contraceptive Methods--side effects; Developed Countries; Family Planning; Massachusetts; Menstruation Disorders; North America; Northern America; Research Methodology; Theoretical Effectiveness; United States; Urogenital Effects; Use-effectiveness; Vaginal Barrier Methods--complications; Vaginal Barrier Methods--contraindications; Vaginal Barrier Methods--side effects

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1982        PMID: 7075188     DOI: 10.1016/0010-7824(82)90026-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Contraception        ISSN: 0010-7824            Impact factor:   3.375


  3 in total

1.  The Use of the Cavity-Rim Cervical Cap in a Family Physician's Office.

Authors:  M Rev; V Gruson; W Latta
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  1986-08       Impact factor: 3.275

2.  Vaginal mechanical contraceptive devices.

Authors:  M Smith; B N Barwin
Journal:  Can Med Assoc J       Date:  1983-10-01       Impact factor: 8.262

3.  Cervical caps or diaphragms: answering your patients' questions.

Authors:  M J Donlevy
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  1987-10       Impact factor: 3.275

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.