一项评价 SILCS 隔膜与阴道给药器在阴道凝胶递送上的使用和可接受性的随机交叉研究。
A Randomized Crossover Study Evaluating the Use and Acceptability of the SILCS Diaphragm Compared to Vaginal Applicators for Vaginal Gel Delivery.
机构信息
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.
PATH, PO Box 900922, Seattle, WA, 98119, USA.
出版信息
AIDS Behav. 2018 Jan;22(1):127-132. doi: 10.1007/s10461-017-1913-4.
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.
简介
本研究旨在评估 SILCS 隔膜用于阴道凝胶递药与预灌封给药器相比的可接受性和偏好。
方法
在南非的 115 名女性中进行了一项随机交叉研究，在五次性行为中分别使用两种方法。
结果
我们发现两种产品的可接受性没有显著差异。通过给药器插入时，性事后凝胶泄漏的体验更大。更多的女性对 SILCS/凝胶的多用途保护（68%）感兴趣，而不是单独的 SILCS（17%）或单独的杀微生物凝胶（14%）。
结论
SILCS 凝胶递药系统用于多用途预防似乎是可行和可接受的。
Zotero 插件