Women's Health Issues
Volume 14, Issue 3 , Pages 85-93, May 2004

Acceptability of an existing, female-controlled contraceptive method that could potentially protect against hiv: a comparison of diaphragm users and other method users☆

  • Sheryl Thorburn Bird, PhD, MPH

      Affiliations

    • Department of Public Health, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, USA
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorrespondence to: Sheryl Thorburn Bird, PhD, MPH, Department of Public Health, Oregon State University, 264 Waldo Hall, Corvallis, OR 97331-6406, USA. Phone: 541-737-9493; Fax: 541-737-4001.
    • ,
  • S.Marie Harvey, DrPH

      Affiliations

    • Department of Public Health, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, USA
    • Center for the Study of Women in Society, University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon, USA
    • ,
  • Julie E. Maher, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Program Design and Evaluation Services, Multnomah County Health Department and Oregon Department of Human Services, Portland, Oregon, USA
    • ,
  • Linda J. Beckman, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Alliant International University, Los Angeles, California, USA

Received 20 August 2003; received in revised form 26 January 2004; accepted 3 March 2004.

Abstract 

Objective

The diaphragm, an internal barrier contraceptive device, is a candidate for a female-controlled method for preventing human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and other sexually transmitted infections (STIs). This study's objective was to examine how women who use the diaphragm differ from women using the pill and/or condoms with respect to factors hypothesized to influence the acceptability of contraceptive methods. Our goal was to increase understanding of who finds the diaphragm acceptable and why.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional telephone survey with selected female members of a managed care organization. For this analysis, we limited the sample to 585 women currently using the diaphragm (n = 196), pill (n = 200), condoms (n = 132), or pill and condoms (n = 57). We conducted bivariate analyses and multinomial logistic regression analyses to assess the associations between selected characteristics and diaphragm use.

Results

Diaphragm use was significantly associated with several variables. Of particular interest, placing less importance on hormonal method characteristics was significantly associated with diaphragm use (versus use of the pill, condoms, or both). Placing more importance on barrier method attributes was significantly associated with diaphragm use (versus pill use, alone or with condoms). In addition, lower condom use self-efficacy was significantly associated with diaphragm use (versus condom use, alone or with pill). Lack of motivation to avoid HIV/STIs was significantly associated with using the diaphragm versus condoms (only).

Conclusion

These results have important implications for future research, interventions, counseling strategies for providers, and product development. Our findings suggest that if the diaphragm protects against HIV, it could be a desirable option for some women.

Keywords:  Diaphragm, Barrier methods, Heterosexual transmission of HIV, Female-controlled methods, Sexually transmitted diseases, Women's health

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

☆ This research was supported by Grant Number 5R01 HD40137 from the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development to S.M. Harvey. Dr. Bird and Dr. Beckman were previously with the Center for the Study of Women in Society, University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon. Dr. Maher was previously with the Kaiser Permanente Center for Health Research, Portland, Oregon.

PII: S1049-3867(04)00017-9

doi:10.1016/j.whi.2004.03.003

Women's Health Issues
Volume 14, Issue 3 , Pages 85-93, May 2004

Article Tools