Contraceptive efficacy, safety, fit, and acceptability of a single-size diaphragm developed with end-user input

Jill L Schwartz, Debra H Weiner, Jaim Jou Lai, Ron G Frezieres, Mitchell D Creinin, David F Archer, Lynn Bradley, Kurt T Barnhart, Alfred Poindexter, Maggie Kilbourne-Brook, Marianne M Callahan, Christine K Mauck, Jill L Schwartz, Debra H Weiner, Jaim Jou Lai, Ron G Frezieres, Mitchell D Creinin, David F Archer, Lynn Bradley, Kurt T Barnhart, Alfred Poindexter, Maggie Kilbourne-Brook, Marianne M Callahan, Christine K Mauck

Abstract

Objective: To estimate contraceptive efficacy, safety, acceptability, and fit of a single-size diaphragm used with contraceptive gel.

Methods: We conducted a multicenter trial in which 450 couples used the single-size diaphragm, 300 randomized to acid-buffering gel and 150 to nonoxynol-9, for at least 190 days and six menstrual cycles. Visits were at enrollment and after menstrual cycles 1, 3, and 6. Study outcomes included pregnancy probability, safety, acceptability, and fit. Pregnancy and safety were compared with an historical control group who used a standard diaphragm with these gels.

Results: Most (439/450 [98%]) women could be fitted with the single-size diaphragm. A total of 421 of 450 (94%) provided follow-up. The 35 study pregnancies yielded 6-month Kaplan-Meier cumulative typical use pregnancy probabilities per 100 women with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of 10.4 (6.9-14.0) for all users and 9.6 (5.5-13.6) and 12.5 (5.4-19.5) with acid-buffering gel and nonoxynol-9, respectively. Historical control analysis yielded a propensity score-adjusted estimate of this pregnancy probability for the single-size diaphragm of 11.3 compared with 10.7 per 100 women for the standard diaphragm ([rounded] difference 0.7, 95% CI -3.6 to 4.9). Approximately half (51%) reported at least one urogenital event but compared favorably to the standard diaphragm in historical control analysis. Most (282/342 [82%]) liked the diaphragm. Results suggest that if provided by a clinician, 94% (95% CI 92-96%) could insert, correctly position, and remove the diaphragm.

Conclusion: The single-size diaphragm was safe, as effective as a standard diaphragm, and acceptable when used with contraceptive gel.

Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT00578877.

References

    1. Montgomery ET, Cheng H, van der Straten A, Chidanyika AC, Lince N, Blanchard K, et al.. Acceptability and use of the diaphragm and Replens lubricant gel for HIV prevention in Southern Africa. AIDS Behav 2010;14:629–38.
    1. van der Straten A, Moore J, Napierala S, Clouse K, Mauck C, Hammond N, et al.. Consistent use of a combination product versus a single product in a safety trial of the diaphragm and microbicide in Harare, Zimbabwe. Contraception 2008;77:435–43.
    1. Luchters S, Chersich MF, Jao I, Schroth A, Chidagaya S, Mandaliya K, et al.. Acceptability of the diaphragm in Mombasa Kenya: a 6-month prospective study. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care 2007;12:345–53.
    1. Coffey PS, Kilbourne-Brook M, Brache V, Cochón L. Comparative acceptability of the SILCS and Ortho ALL-FLEX diaphragms among couples in the Dominican Republic. Contraception 2008;78:418–23.
    1. Coffey PS, Kilbourne-Brook M, Beksinska M, Thongkrajai E. Short-term acceptability of a single-size diaphragm among couples in South Africa and Thailand. J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care 2008;34:233–6.
    1. Yang CC, Maravilla KR, Kilbourne-Brook M, Austin G. Magnetic resonance imaging of SILCS diaphragm: anatomical considerations and corroboration with clinical fit. Contraception 2007;76:238–44.
    1. Schwartz JL, Ballagh SA, Creinin MD, Rountree RW, Kilbourne-Brook M, Mauck CK, et al.. SILCS diaphragm: postcoital testing of a new single-size contraceptive device. Contraception 2008;78:237–44.
    1. Moench TR, Chipato T, Padian NS. Preventing disease by protecting the cervix: the unexplored promise of internal vaginal barrier devices. AIDS 2001;15:1595–602.
    1. Barnhart KT, Rosenberg MJ, MacKay HT, Blithe DL, Higgins J, Walsh T, et al.. Contraceptive efficacy of a novel spermicidal microbicide used with a diaphragm: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 2007;110:577–86.
    1. Olmsted SS, Dubin NH, Cone RA, Moench TR. The rate at which human sperm are immobilized and killed by mild acidity. Fertil Steril 2000;73:687–93.
    1. Zeitlin L, Hoen TE, Achilles SL, Hegarty TA, Jerse AE, Kreider JW, et al.. Tests of BufferGel for contraception and prevention of sexually transmitted diseases in animal models. Sex Transm Dis 2001;28:417–23.
    1. Mayer KH, Peipert J, Fleming T, Fullem A, Moench T, Cu-Uvin S, et al.. Safety and tolerability of BufferGel, a novel vaginal microbicide, in women in the United States. Clin Infect Dis 2001;32:476–82.
    1. Tabet SR, Callahan MM, Mauck CK, Gai F, Coletti AS, Profy AT, et al.. Safety and acceptability of penile application of 2 candidate topical microbicides: BufferGel and PRO 2000 Gel: 3 randomized trials in healthy low-risk men and HIV-positive men. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 2003;33:476–83.
    1. Harwell JI, Moench T, Mayer KH, Chapman S, Rodriguez I, Cu-Uvin S. A pilot study of treatment of bacterial vaginosis with a buffering vaginal microbicide. J Womens Health (Larchmt) 2003;12:255–9.
    1. Peto R, Pike MC, Armitage P, Breslow NE, Cox DR, Howard SV, et al.. Design and analysis of randomized clinical trials requiring prolonged observation of each patient. II. analysis and examples. Br J Cancer 1977;35:1–39.
    1. Trussell J, Sturgen K, Strickler J, Dominik R. Comparative contraceptive efficacy of the female condom and other barrier methods. Fam Plann Perspect 1994;26:66–72.
    1. Wilcox AJ, Dunson DB, Weinberg CR, Trussell J, Baird DD. Likelihood of conception with a single act of intercourse: providing benchmark rates for assessment of post-coital contraceptives. Contraception 2001;63:211–5.

Source: PubMed

3
Prenumerera