Cervical Cap versus Diaphragm for Contraception

Gallo, Manuel; Da, Grimes; Schulz, K F

doi:10.1111/j.1523-536x.2003.00219.x

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Femcap ® , available since 2002, is a silicone rubber cervical cap claimed to be easier to fit and remove due to its sailor's hat shape. It was found to carry a higher failure rate than the diaphragm in a review of small studies [90].…”

Section: Barrier Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contraceptive Options during Perimenopause

Bazi

Zreik

2006

Womens Health (Lond Engl)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

During the transition years leading to menopause, the possibility of conception persists, although at a lower rate. Contraceptive choices available to perimenopausal women are as varied as those for their younger counterparts, albeit with some limitations related predominantly to coexisting medical conditions rather than the advancing age itself. In this review, different contraceptive choices pertaining to this age group will be discussed, with a focus on evidence-based data.

show abstract

Section: Barrier Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contraceptive Options during Perimenopause

Bazi

Zreik

2006

Womens Health (Lond Engl)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…If a diaphragm user is experiencing recurrent UTIs, a refit or change of rim type may help, or she may wish to try the cervical cap which has been associated with lower odds of UTIs than diaphragms 66 Post-coital voiding or antibiotic use may help. 67…”

Section: Troubleshootingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Canadian Contraception Consensus Chapter 5 Barrier Methods

2015

Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is no evidence that condoms lubricated with N-9 are more effective in preventing pregnancy or sexually transmitted infections than lubricated condoms that do CHAPTER 5 Barrier Methods NOVEMBER JOGC NOVEMBRE 2015 l S13 CHAPTER 5: Barrier Methods not contain N-9. Due to the potential adverse effects of N-9, including an increased risk of HIV transmission, 16 the use of condoms lubricated with N-9 is not recommended. Mechanism of Action The condom acts as a mechanical barrier to prevent exchange of fluid and semen. Some condoms tend to fit better than others; optimal fitting requires trying a variety of condoms. Indications Condoms are indicated for the prevention of pregnancy and STIs. Ideally, condoms should be used in addition to another primary contraceptive method (dual protection), because condom use provides protection against STIs and additional backup contraception. Contraindications

show abstract

“…As with Lea's Shield, evidence for FemCap's contraceptive effectiveness and acceptability comes from only one clinical trial, done as part of the application for FDA approval 18 . A Cochrane Database Review used that study's findings to compare the Prentif cervical cap, the diaphragm, and the FemCap for contraceptive efficacy, safety, discontinuation, and acceptability 19 . The FemCap study randomized 814 sexually‐active women at 10 sites in the United States to 6 months use of either the FemCap or the Ortho All‐Flex diaphragm (Ortho‐McNeil Pharmaceutical, Inc., Raritan, NJ); both groups used spermicide with their respective device.…”

Section: Common Characteristics Of Cervical Barrier Contraceptive Metmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The 6‐month cumulative pregnancy rate for typical use of FemCap was 13.5%, while the rate for diaphragm users was 8%, and the extrapolated 12‐month failure rates were 23/100 women for FemCap and 14/100 women for the diaphragm. While subjects in the FemCap group reported high levels of device acceptability, 30% reported device dislodgement versus 6% of diaphragm users, and 12% reported difficulty removing FemCap versus 4% of diaphragm users 19 . The device was subsequently modified to have a higher brim to decrease dislodgement, and a strap for easier removal.…”

Section: Common Characteristics Of Cervical Barrier Contraceptive Metmentioning

confidence: 99%

Women's Barrier Contraceptive Methods: Poised for Change

Narrigan

2006

J Midwife Womens Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the past 20 years, the number of women in the United States choosing a cervical barrier contraceptive method has dramatically declined. By 2002, fewer than 3% of women reported using any woman-initiated barrier method, including the diaphragm, female condom, or cervical cap. At the same time, however, research in infectious diseases indicates that cervical barriers may effectively prevent the transmission of several sexually transmitted infection. This possibility has fueled the recent development of two novel devices. This article examines the seven devices currently available in the United States, comparing their characteristics, efficacy, benefits, and drawbacks. Compared to the diaphragm, the new devices do not offer improved odds of pregnancy prevention, and evidence for their efficacy is sparse. Reasons for the limited acceptance of these methods as contraceptives on one hand-and for interest in their potential for limiting sexually transmitted infections on the other-will also be reviewed. Despite the limited acceptance of cervical barrier methods, midwives and other clinicians should promote their availability as an alternative to other reversible contraceptives.

show abstract

Cervical Cap versus Diaphragm for Contraception

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

Contraceptive Options during Perimenopause

Contraceptive Options during Perimenopause

Canadian Contraception Consensus Chapter 5 Barrier Methods

Women's Barrier Contraceptive Methods: Poised for Change

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About