Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Contraception Behavior”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 919 records · Page 51Linked to original sources
PubMedDate not supplied

Clinical pearls: factors affecting reported contraceptive efficacy rates in clinical studies.

Current combination oral contraceptives (OCs) are among the most popular, safe, and effective methods of reversible contraception. There are, however, many factors that can affect contraceptive failure rates as reported in clinical trials, including subject characteristics, factors related to study methodology and data analysis, and publication biases. The variability of these factors among clinical trials makes meaningful comparisons of contraceptive efficacy data across studies difficult, if not misleading or erroneous. It is even more difficult to reconcile the differences between clinical trial efficacy rates and everyday use rates; for instance, the National Survey of Family Growth reported that the rate of OC failure is close to 8% in the United States, which is higher than rates reported in clinical trials. Thus, it is important for the clinician to consider the many factors that can influence reporting of contraceptive failure rates in clinical trials and be aware of the limitations in differentiating OCs on the basis of contraceptive efficacy derived from clinical trial data. Furthermore, clinical trial data may not accurately predict contraceptive efficacy in everyday use.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

Pilot study of short-term acceptability and breakage and slippage rates for the loose-fitting polyurethane male condom eZ.on bi-directional: a randomized cross-over trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the short-term acceptability and functionality of the eZ.on condom compared with currently marketed latex (Gossamer) and polyurethane (Avanti) condoms. Method Healthy, sexually active volunteers aged 18-50 years, self-selected from among the UK population, were enrolled in a randomized cross-over trial. Participants were required to test six of each of three condom variants. Data were collected on structured questionnaires by means of postal and telephone contacts. Main outcome measures were breakage and slippage rates, and short-term user acceptability based on participants' ratings documented in end-of-study questionnaires. RESULTS: Forty-three couples entered the study, of whom 37 tested the condoms on 512 occasions. There was no statistically significant difference in the clinical breakage rate between eZ.on (3.7%) and the comparator condoms (3.5% for Gossamer and 2.9% for Avanti). Complete slippage rates were similar for eZ.on (2.4%) and Avanti (2.9%). Gossamer had the lowest slippage rate (1.2%), but this difference was not statistically significant. User acceptability was similar for the three condom types; however, there was a trend for more participants to express dissatisfaction with eZ.on, including difficulties with putting on the condom. CONCLUSIONS: No firm conclusions can be drawn from this pilot study, but our observations suggest that eZ.on may be an acceptable option for some couples unwilling or unable to use a latex condom.

Adult↗