Wear and care of the SILCS diaphragm: Experience from three countries

Sexual Health

Volumn 7, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 159-164

  Coffey, Patricia S ^a   Kilbourne Brook, Maggie ^a  

^a PATH   (United States)

Author keywords

acceptability; barrier device; contraception; Dominican Republic; South Africa; Thailand

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DOMINICAN REPUBLIC; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTRAUTERINE CONTRACEPTIVE DEVICE; MALE; MECHANICAL STRESS; SEXUALLY TRANSMITTED DISEASE; SINGLE SIZE CONTRACEPTIVE BARRIER DEVICE; SOUTH AFRICA; THAILAND;

ADMINISTRATION, INTRAVAGINAL; ADULT; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; CONSUMER SATISFACTION; CONTRACEPTION BEHAVIOR; CONTRACEPTIVE DEVICES, FEMALE; DOMINICAN REPUBLIC; FEMALE; HUMANS; HYGIENE; MALE; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY, UNPLANNED; QUESTIONNAIRES; SEXUAL PARTNERS; SOUTH AFRICA; THAILAND; WOMEN'S HEALTH; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 77954018048     PISSN: 14485028     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1071/SH09049     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Ortayli N, Bulut A, Nalbant H, Cottingham J. Is the diaphragm a viable option for women in Turkey? Int Fam Plan Perspect 2000; 26: 36-42. doi:10.2307/2648288
2. World Health Organization. Creating common ground in Asia: women's perspectives on the selection and introduction of fertility regulation technologies. Report of a meeting between women's health advocates, researchers, providers and policymakers. Geneva: WHO/HRP/WOM/94.1; 2004.
3. do Lago TD, Barbosa RM, Kalckmann S, Villela WV, Gohiman S. Acceptability of the diaphragm among low-income women in Sao Paulo, Brazil. Int Fam Plan Perspect 1995; 21: 114-118 doi:10.2307/2133185
4. HarveySM,BirdST,BranchMR.Anewlookatanoldmethod:thediaphragm. PerspectSexReprodHealth2003;35:270-273doi:10.1363/3527003(Pubitemid38063087)
5. UNFPA. Donor support for contraceptives and condoms for STI/HIV prevention. New York: UNFPA. Available at: http://www.unfpa.org/upload/lib-pub- file/681-filename-dsr-2005.pdf [accessed December 2009].
6. Reproductive health supplies coalition RHInterchange data tool. Available at: http://rhi.rhsupplies.org/rhi/index.do?locale=en-US[verified February 2010].
7. Coffey PS, Kilbourne-Brook M, Vrache V, Cochon L. Comparative acceptability of the SILCS and Ortho ALL-FLEX diaphragms among couples in the Dominican Republic. Contraception 2008; 78: 418-423 doi:10.1016/j.contraception. 2008.07.001
8. Coffey PS, Kilbourne-Brook M, Beksinska M, Thongkrajai E. Shortterm acceptability of a single-size diaphragm among couples in South Africa and Thailand. J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care 2008; 34: 233-236 doi:10.1783/ 147118908786000569
9. PATH. SILCS Diaphragm: acceptability of a single-size, reusable cervical barrier by couples in three countries [poster session]. PC33 Microbicides 2006 Conference; 2006 April 24-26; Cape Town, South Africa.
10. Ravindran TKS, Rao SS. Is the diaphragm a suitable method of contraception for low-income women: a user perspectives study, Madras, India. In Ravindran TKS, Berer M, Cottingham J, editors. Beyond acceptability: users' perspectives on contraception. London: Reproductive Health Matters, for the World Health Organization; 1997. pp. 78-88.
11. Bulut A, Ortayli N, Ringheim K, Cottingham J, Farley TM, Peregoudov A, et al. Assessing the acceptability, service delivery requirements, and use-effectiveness of the diaphragm in Colombia, Philippines, and Turkey. Contraception 2001; 63: 267-275 doi:10.1016/S0010-7824(01)00204-9 (Pubitemid 32607689)
12. van der Straten A, Kang MS, Posner SF, Kamba M, Chipato T. Predictors of diaphragm use as a potential sexually transmitted disease/HIV prevention method in Zimbabwe. Sex Transm Dis 2005; 32: 64-71. doi:10.1097/01.olq.0000148301. 90343.3a (Pubitemid 40054163)
13. Behets F, Turner AN, Van Damme K, Rabenja NL, Ravelomanana N, Zeller K, et al. Acceptability and feasibility of continuous diaphragm use among sex workers in Madagascar. Sex Transm Infect 2005; 81: 472-476 doi:10.1136/sti.2005. 015107 (Pubitemid 41811328)
14. Buck J, Kang M, van der Straten A, Khumalo-Sakutukwa G, Posner S, Padian N. Barrier method preferences and perceptions among Zimbabwean women and their partners. AIDS Behav 2005; 9: 415-422 doi:10.1007/s10461-005-9013-2
15. Okal J, Stadler J, Ombidi W, Jao I, Luchters S, Temmerman M, et al. Secrecy, disclosure and accidental discovery: perspectives of diaphragm users in Mombasa, Kenya. Cult Health Sex 2008; 10: 13-26. doi:10.1080/13691050701519730
16. Harvey SM, Bird ST, Maher JE, Beckman LJ. Who continues using the diaphragm and who doesn't: implications for the acceptability of female-controlled HIV prevention methods. Women's Health Issues 2003; 13: 185-193 doi:10.1016/S1049-3867(03)00040-9
17. Maher JE, Harvey SM, Bird ST, Stevens VJ, Beckman LJ. Acceptability of the vaginal diaphragm among current users. Perspect Sex Reprod Health 2004; 36: 64-71. doi:10.1363/3606404
18. Sharma A, Bukusi E, Posner S, Feldman D, Ngugi E, Cohen CR. Sex preparation and diaphragm acceptability in sex work in Nairobi, Kenya. Sex Health 2006; 3: 261-268 doi:10.1071/SH06021