Format

Send to

Choose Destination
AIDS Behav. 2018 Jan;22(1):127-132. doi: 10.1007/s10461-017-1913-4.

A Randomized Crossover Study Evaluating the Use and Acceptability of the SILCS Diaphragm Compared to Vaginal Applicators for Vaginal Gel Delivery.

Author information

1
MatCH Research Unit [Maternal, Adolescent and Child Health Research Unit], Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Durban, 3629, South Africa. mbeksinska@matchresearch.co.za.
2
MatCH Research Unit [Maternal, Adolescent and Child Health Research Unit], Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Durban, 3629, South Africa.
3
PATH, PO Box 900922, Seattle, WA, 98119, USA.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION:

This study aimed to assess acceptability and preferences for the SILCS diaphragm for vaginal gel delivery compared to a prefilled applicator.

METHODS:

A randomized crossover study among 115 women in South Africa, using both methods during five sex acts.

RESULTS:

We found no significant differences in acceptability between the two products. Experience of gel leakage after sex was greater when inserted via applicator. More women were interested in SILCS/gel for multipurpose protection (68%) than in either SILCS alone (17%) or microbicide gel alone (14%).

CONCLUSIONS:

A SILCS gel delivery system for multipurpose prevention seems feasible and acceptable.

KEYWORDS:

Barrier methods; Diaphragm; Gel; MPT; Multipurpose technology; Vaginal applicator

PMID:
28993940
DOI:
10.1007/s10461-017-1913-4

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Springer
Loading ...
Support Center