Sexually transmitted diseases · 2006
Does a choice of condoms impact sexually transmitted infection incidence? A randomized, controlled trial.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Steiner Markus J, Hylton-Kong Tina, Figueroa J Peter, Hobbs Marcia M, Behets Frieda, Smikle Monica, Tweedy Katie, Powell Sharon, McNeil Linda, Brathwaite Alfred
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess whether providing a choice of condoms would increase condom acceptability, increase self-reported use, and decrease incident sexually transmitted infection.
STUDY: We randomized 414 men presenting with urethral discharge in Jamaica to receive either the "standard" clinic condom or a choice of 4 different types of condoms. Men were treated presumptively at enrollment and followed up at 1, 2, 4, and 6 months.
RESULTS: Participants in the choice group had a strong preference (P <0.01) for the most popular condom available in Jamaica. This preference did not translate into higher condom use (P = 0.16). The 6-month cumulative probability of first incidence of gonorrhea, chlamydia, or trichomoniasis was slightly higher in the choice group (21%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 15-28%) versus the control group (17%; 95% CI, 11-23%); the difference in the survival curves was not significant (P = 0.35).
CONCLUSION: A choice of condoms may increase perceived acceptability but not lead to increased condom use and subsequently lower sexually transmitted infection rates.
STUDY: We randomized 414 men presenting with urethral discharge in Jamaica to receive either the "standard" clinic condom or a choice of 4 different types of condoms. Men were treated presumptively at enrollment and followed up at 1, 2, 4, and 6 months.
RESULTS: Participants in the choice group had a strong preference (P <0.01) for the most popular condom available in Jamaica. This preference did not translate into higher condom use (P = 0.16). The 6-month cumulative probability of first incidence of gonorrhea, chlamydia, or trichomoniasis was slightly higher in the choice group (21%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 15-28%) versus the control group (17%; 95% CI, 11-23%); the difference in the survival curves was not significant (P = 0.35).
CONCLUSION: A choice of condoms may increase perceived acceptability but not lead to increased condom use and subsequently lower sexually transmitted infection rates.