Trial reportJournal of the International AIDS Society2010
An acceptability and safety study of the Duet cervical barrier and gel delivery system in Zimbabwe.
Trial report in Journal of the International AIDS Society, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Perspectives from Young South African and Zimbabwean Women on Attributes of Four (Placebo) Vaginal Microbicide Delivery Forms.AIDS and behavior · 2020Trial
- Acceptability and use of a dapivirine vaginal ring in a phase III trial.AIDS (London, England) · 2017Trial
- 'Let Us Protect Our Future' a culturally congruent evidenced-based HIV/STD risk-reduction intervention for young South African adolescents.Health education research · 2014Trial
- Women's experiences with oral and vaginal pre-exposure prophylaxis: the VOICE-C qualitative study in Johannesburg, South Africa.PloS one · 2014Trial
- Change in condom and other barrier method use during and after an HIV prevention trial in Zimbabwe.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2010Trial
- Effectiveness and acceptability of two insertable device models for non-surgical management of obstetric fistula: protocol for a hybrid type I randomized crossover trial.BMC women's health · 2025Article
- Optimizing HIV prevention for women: a review of evidence from microbicide studies and considerations for gender-sensitive microbicide introduction.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2015Review
- Methodological lessons from clinical trials and the future of microbicide research.Current HIV/AIDS reports · 2013Review
- Moving beyond safe sex to women-controlled safe sex: a concept analysis.Journal of advanced nursing · 2012Review
- The Sexual Acceptability of Contraception: Reviewing the Literature and Building a New Concept.Journal of sex researchReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAdherence problems with coitally dependent, female-initiated HIV prevention methods have contributed to several trials' failure to establish efficacy. Continuous use of a cervical barrier with once-daily cleaning and immediate reinsertion may simplify use for women and improve adherence. We assessed the acceptability and safety of precoital and continuous use of the Duet, a cervical barrier and gel delivery system, in Zimbabwean women.
methodsUsing a two-arm crossover design with a parallel observation group, we randomized 103 women in a 2:2:1 ratio: (1) to use the Duet continuously for 14 days, followed by a minimum of seven days of washout and then 14 days of precoital use; (2) to use the same Duet regimens in reverse order; or (3) for observation only. Women were aged 18 to 40 years; half were recruited from a pool of previous diaphragm study participants and the other half from the general community. Acceptability and adherence were assessed through an interviewer-administered questionnaire at each of two follow-up visits. Safety was monitored through pelvic speculum exams and report of adverse events.
resultsThe proportion of women who reported consistent Duet use during sex was virtually identical during continuous and precoital regimens (88.6% vs. 88.9%). Partner refusal was the most common reason cited for non-use during sex in both use regimens. Not having the device handy was the most common reason cited for non-daily use (in the continuous regimen). Most women were "very comfortable" using it continuously (86.3%) and inserting it precoitally (92.8%). The most favoured Duet attribute was that it did not interfere with "natural" sex (55%). The least favoured Duet attribute was the concern that it might come out during sex (71.3%). No serious adverse events were reported during the study; 57 participants reported 90 adverse events classified as mild or moderate. There were no statistically significant differences in: (1) the proportion of women reporting adverse events; (2) the severity of events among those using the Duet and observational controls; or (3) event severity reported during each regimen use period.
conclusionsIn this study, the Duet was found to be acceptable and safe when inserted precoitally or used continuously for 14 days. Assignment to use of the Duet continuously did not increase adherence to the Duet during sex. Future HIV prevention trials should evaluate use of the Duet (precoitally and continuously) with promising microbicide candidates.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.