What about female condoms and sexually transmitted diseases STDs? Condoms also reduce the transmission of human papillomavirus HPV. Can I get pregnant if…? Share this post:. Share on facebook Facebook. Share on twitter Twitter. Share on linkedin LinkedIn. Share on email Email. Similar Post. Types of Birth Control Contraception is a term used for methods of preventing pregnancy and is often referred to as birth control.
There are…. Depo-Provera is an injection containing the synthetic hormone progestin which is called depo-medroxyprogesterone acetate DMPA. Depo-Provera is a hormonal…. In the United States, Zedalis noted that preferences are relatively "meat and potatoes. Europeans like their textures, shapes and box designs a bit racier while Brazilians seem to have a taste for menthol and peppermint. Not surprisingly, the Chinese are the heaviest users; surprisingly, the British come in second, according to Australia-based Ansell.
The United States ranks sixth. Most submissions fall into one of two general categories: Either adding additional texture such as bumps, or changing to a unique shape that probably isn't practical to manufacture.
Zedalis has recently been getting a lot of suggestions about adding bells and whistles. While the female condom was introduced to this country in , Zedalis noted that it has not been a hit. The typical model consists of a pocket or pouch that fits over the opening of the vagina.
It's inserted by a flexible ring that remains on the outside of the vagina to hold it in place, guide intercourse and prevent internal bunching. An idea that has been better received: Many condom makers are exploring the addition of L-arginine to the lubricant, a compound that purports to enhance female pleasure.
Short of abstinence, Zedalis said, condoms are the most effective form of birth control. While not perfect, they also have the benefit of helping to prevent sexually transmitted diseases such as AIDS, genital herpes and chlamydia.
Despite the quest for ever-increasing thinness and comfort, condoms are an effective barrier not only to sperm but viruses and bacteria as well. Once condoms leave the factory, samples are again pulled and tested for holes and defects and then again by the Food and Drug Administration. The cost-effectiveness analysis builds on assumptions about key parameters, many of which have significant associated uncertainty. Sensitivity analysis helps determine the extent to which changes in these assumptions might substantially alter the findings.
We also examined the extent to which our findings might vary when including estimates of child DALYs averted to our FP impact estimates. The sensitivity range for each of these parameters are presented in S9 Table. We carried out one-way and multi-way sensitivity analyses on these parameters. Our estimates show current use of We estimate the total need for condoms at Table 4 reveals the family planning condom gap is concentrated in Southern Asia, and Middle and Western Africa.
Detailed tables, including global estimates of current use, need and gap for condoms by country can be found in Tables A-C, F and I in S1 File. As shown in Table 8 , from to under the Medium Scenario condoms for family planning avert 97 million births and 1. From to , under the Medium Scenario condoms prevent 0.
During this same period, under the High Scenario, condoms prevent This occurs when there is no evidence of an increasing trend in condom use rates between the last two national surveys. In those cases condom use rates in the medium scenario are identical to those in the Low scenario. Table 10 shows our estimates of baseline STI incidence cases of gonorrhea, chlamydia, syphilis, and HSV-2 of million among men and 93 million among women.
Under the Medium Scenario, condom use averts Additional details for each country are presented in Table N in S1 File. Table 11 displays the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio ICER. Additional country and regional details are in Table P in S1 File. The ICER by region produces similar results, and a country-by-country analysis shows that condom investment for — is highly cost-effective or cost-effective in 71 of 81 countries under the Medium Scenario, and 79 of 81 countries under the High Scenario.
Changes in the other parameters also produce large shifts in the ICERs. We also carried out a multi-way sensitivity analysis that combined all the parameters to produce a single value associated with setting all parameters at the low end of the sensitivity range and another value for setting all parameters at the high end of the sensitivity range. Changes in the other parameters also produce shifts in the ICERs.
The analysis in the previous section showed that, according to the WHO thresholds, the condom investment is a highly cost-effective intervention. But, how do condoms compare to other interventions with similar aims? The width of the bar represents the range between the low and high cost-effectiveness ratio, in cases where the study reported a range of results. The low-end results for the condom investment case ICERs are roughly comparable to other prevention interventions. At the higher end of our sensitivity analyses, the condom investment case ICERs compare less favorably to other interventions.
Our low-end estimates are also similar to the ICERs for a range of other reproductive and maternal and child health interventions recently analyzed in a forthcoming study Horton and Levin forthcoming. With health funding levels stagnant or falling, it is important to understand the cost and health impact associated with prevention technologies.
This study is one of the first to try to quantify the cost and combined health impact of condom use as a means to prevent unwanted pregnancy, and to prevent transmission of STIs, including HIV. We found an annual gap between current and desired use of These translate into Over the long term, eliminating the gap could allow countries to avert million DALYs by The health gains are more modest under a medium scenario that assumes the continuation of current use trends.
Moreover, when placed against other interventions with similar sexual and reproductive health aims, condom investments compare favorably.
First, our analysis uses a narrow definition of condom use. To determine condom use for family planning, we use DHS data which refers to women who report using condoms as their main method of family planning. We do not have information about correct or consistent use of condoms. Our analysis also may not include condom use for family planning by key population groups. Second, we began our analysis by estimating the number of condoms used in for family planning, but we did not calculate the actual number of condoms distributed in the year prior to the baseline year in this analysis to compare these to.
We did attempt to estimate the availability of condoms from the private sector and public sector in , as seen in Table K in S1 File. The estimate of 8. It is estimated that of these 8. Third, we were conservative in our estimates of condom use and impact, in part to minimize double-and triple- counting of condom. For example, we assumed no births averted impact from the condoms used by groups at medium and high risk of HIV and STI infection; some limited impact likely exists.
For lack of information on condom prevention effectiveness and case incidence rates from other STIs e. We also assumed that condom use among low-risk groups would affect probability of transmission of only one of the four STIs. In addition, in our tally of family planning condoms, we did not count condoms that women reported using in addition to a more effective contraceptive method such as oral pill or injectable.
Thus, our impact estimates likely understate the true impact of condoms on prevention. Fourth, there was substantial uncertainty around certain key parameters including coital frequency, discount rate for costs, and unit cost to provide condoms. We addressed this through sensitivity analysis. Fifth, our base case did not count the impact of condoms on child DALYs averted from family planning use. When the impact of child DALYs averted from family planning use are incorporated into the analysis, investments in condoms are much more cost-effective.
Any comparisons to previous cost-effectiveness studies measuring contraceptive impact, which generally include impact on child DALYs, should consider this difference. Finally, care should be taken comparing our results with other studies.
Other studies might calculate both cost and effectiveness differently. Moreover, differences in costs between countries further hamper comparisons. We in part addressed these shortcoming by drawing from a broad and extensive range of other studies against which to compare the condom investment results.
With these limitations in mind, our results point to a high potential impact of male condoms, and thus the value of continued investment in them. Meeting all demand for condom use would have a large health impact through prevention of unwanted pregnancy, and prevention of HIV and other STIs.
We are grateful to the Steering Committee for their contributions to the investment case analysis plan and report. This publication was funded through Contract No. The funders reviewed the analysis plan and manuscript. National Center for Biotechnology Information , U. PLoS One. Published online May John Stover , 1 James E.
Korenromp , 1 Howard S. James E. Eline L. Howard S. Rachel A. Nugent, Editor. Author information Article notes Copyright and License information Disclaimer. Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist. Received Dec 15; Accepted Apr
0コメント