» Articles » PMID: 20687954

An Acceptability and Safety Study of the Duet Cervical Barrier and Gel Delivery System in Zimbabwe

Overview
Journal J Int AIDS Soc
Date 2010 Aug 7
PMID 20687954
Citations 9
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Adherence problems with coitally dependent, female-initiated HIV prevention methods have contributed to several trials' failure to establish efficacy. Continuous use of a cervical barrier with once-daily cleaning and immediate reinsertion may simplify use for women and improve adherence. We assessed the acceptability and safety of precoital and continuous use of the Duet, a cervical barrier and gel delivery system, in Zimbabwean women.

Methods: Using a two-arm crossover design with a parallel observation group, we randomized 103 women in a 2:2:1 ratio: (1) to use the Duet continuously for 14 days, followed by a minimum of seven days of washout and then 14 days of precoital use; (2) to use the same Duet regimens in reverse order; or (3) for observation only. Women were aged 18 to 40 years; half were recruited from a pool of previous diaphragm study participants and the other half from the general community. Acceptability and adherence were assessed through an interviewer-administered questionnaire at each of two follow-up visits. Safety was monitored through pelvic speculum exams and report of adverse events.

Results: The proportion of women who reported consistent Duet use during sex was virtually identical during continuous and precoital regimens (88.6% vs. 88.9%). Partner refusal was the most common reason cited for non-use during sex in both use regimens. Not having the device handy was the most common reason cited for non-daily use (in the continuous regimen). Most women were "very comfortable" using it continuously (86.3%) and inserting it precoitally (92.8%). The most favoured Duet attribute was that it did not interfere with "natural" sex (55%). The least favoured Duet attribute was the concern that it might come out during sex (71.3%). No serious adverse events were reported during the study; 57 participants reported 90 adverse events classified as mild or moderate. There were no statistically significant differences in: (1) the proportion of women reporting adverse events; (2) the severity of events among those using the Duet and observational controls; or (3) event severity reported during each regimen use period.

Conclusions: In this study, the Duet was found to be acceptable and safe when inserted precoitally or used continuously for 14 days. Assignment to use of the Duet continuously did not increase adherence to the Duet during sex. Future HIV prevention trials should evaluate use of the Duet (precoitally and continuously) with promising microbicide candidates.

Citing Articles

Perspectives from Young South African and Zimbabwean Women on Attributes of Four (Placebo) Vaginal Microbicide Delivery Forms.

Weinrib R, Browne E, Shapley-Quinn M, van der Straten A, Beksinska M, Mgodi N AIDS Behav. 2019; 24(2):637-647.

PMID: 31254190 PMC: 6988116. DOI: 10.1007/s10461-019-02576-8.


Acceptability and use of a dapivirine vaginal ring in a phase III trial.

Montgomery E, van der Straten A, Chitukuta M, Reddy K, Woeber K, Atujuna M AIDS. 2017; 31(8):1159-1167.

PMID: 28441175 PMC: 5557083. DOI: 10.1097/QAD.0000000000001452.


The Sexual Acceptability of Contraception: Reviewing the Literature and Building a New Concept.

Higgins J, Smith N J Sex Res. 2016; 53(4-5):417-56.

PMID: 26954608 PMC: 4868075. DOI: 10.1080/00224499.2015.1134425.


Optimizing HIV prevention for women: a review of evidence from microbicide studies and considerations for gender-sensitive microbicide introduction.

Doggett E, Lanham M, Wilcher R, Gafos M, Karim Q, Heise L J Int AIDS Soc. 2015; 18:20536.

PMID: 26700845 PMC: 4689151. DOI: 10.7448/IAS.18.1.20536.


Women's experiences with oral and vaginal pre-exposure prophylaxis: the VOICE-C qualitative study in Johannesburg, South Africa.

van der Straten A, Stadler J, Montgomery E, Hartmann M, Magazi B, Mathebula F PLoS One. 2014; 9(2):e89118.

PMID: 24586534 PMC: 3931679. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0089118.


References
1.
Patton D, Sweeney Y, Cummings P, Meyn L, Rabe L, Hillier S . Safety and efficacy evaluations for vaginal and rectal use of BufferGel in the macaque model. Sex Transm Dis. 2004; 31(5):290-6. DOI: 10.1097/01.olq.0000124614.91448.d4. View

2.
Beckman L, Harvey S, Thorburn S, Maher J, Burns K . Women's acceptance of the diaphragm: the role of relationship factors. J Sex Res. 2007; 43(4):297-306. DOI: 10.1080/00224490609552329. View

3.
Nugent R, Krohn M, Hillier S . Reliability of diagnosing bacterial vaginosis is improved by a standardized method of gram stain interpretation. J Clin Microbiol. 1991; 29(2):297-301. PMC: 269757. DOI: 10.1128/jcm.29.2.297-301.1991. View

4.
Philpott A, Knerr W, Maher D . Promoting protection and pleasure: amplifying the effectiveness of barriers against sexually transmitted infections and pregnancy. Lancet. 2006; 368(9551):2028-31. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(06)69810-3. View

5.
Montgomery E, Cheng H, van der Straten A, Chidanyika A, Lince N, Blanchard K . Acceptability and use of the diaphragm and Replens lubricant gel for HIV prevention in Southern Africa. AIDS Behav. 2009; 14(3):629-38. PMC: 2865647. DOI: 10.1007/s10461-009-9609-z. View