Safety, functionality and acceptability of a prototype polyurethane condom

Condom type may influence sexual behavior and ejaculation and complicate the assessment of condom functionality

BACKGROUND

Studies that evaluate condom effectiveness are affected by factors related to how the condom was used, and these factors may not be consistent between different types of condoms. Also, subjective assessments of the sexual act may be unreliable.

STUDY DESIGN

We performed a secondary data analysis of a randomized crossover trial of male and female condoms among 108 couples.

RESULTS

Self-reported duration and activeness of coital acts were significantly different for uses of the male condom compared to uses of the female condom. Fewer individuals reported ejaculation occurring with the female condom. Reliability of self-reports of ejaculation compared to a biological marker of semen detected inside the used male and female condoms was not strong.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that sexual behaviors appear to differ by the type of condom used for the coital act. Studies should consider sexual behavior when evaluating condom effectiveness. Furthermore, studies would be strengthened by the use of a biological marker of semen to determine whether ejaculation, and therefore a true risk of exposure, occurred.

Clinical breakage, slippage and acceptability of a new commercial polyurethane condom: a randomized, controlled study

Although latex remains the primary material for male condoms, a number of condoms made from synthetic materials have appeared in commercial markets in recent years. Published data on the safety and efficacy of these condoms is still limited, but nevertheless synthetic condoms do offer the user a wider choice and may encourage greater use of condoms for contraception and sexual transmitted infection prophylaxis. This paper reports on a study carried out in the Paris region of France on a new, commercial polyurethane condom marketed in Japan as Sagami Original and in Europe as Protex Original. A standard latex condom complying with the European standard for condoms (EN 600:1996) from the same manufacturer was used as the control in the study. The clinical breakage rate for the polyurethane condom was 0.6% (95% confidence interval 0.2-1.4%) compared to 1.3% (95% confidence interval 0.6-2.2%) for the latex condom. The difference was not statistically significant (chi(2) = 1.9, p = 0.168). Clinically significant slippage (complete slippage of the condom off the penis) was 1.1% (95% confidence interval 0.5-1.9%) for the polyurethane condom, compared to 0.5% (95% confidence interval 0.2-1.2%) for the latex; a difference that again was not statistically significant (chi(2) = 1.783, p = 0.182). The polyurethane condom was therefore equivalent to the latex condom in terms of clinical failure rate.

Non-latex versus latex male condoms for contraception

BACKGROUND

The male condom, which consists of a thin sheath placed over the glans and shaft of the penis, is designed to prevent pregnancy by providing a physical barrier against the deposition of semen into the vagina during intercourse. Beginning in the 1990s, nonlatex male condoms made of polyurethane film or synthetic elastomers were developed as alternative male barrier methods for individuals with allergies, sensitivities or preferences that prevented the consistent use of condoms made of latex.

OBJECTIVES

The review sought to evaluate nonlatex male condoms in comparison with latex condoms in terms of contraceptive efficacy, breakage, slippage, safety and user preferences.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE using PubMed, EMBASE, Popline, and LILACS for randomized controlled trials of nonlatex condoms. The references of eligible publications were assessed for inclusion. We also wrote to the manufacturers of nonlatex condoms and known investigators in an attempt to locate any other published or unpublished trials not identified in our search.

SELECTION CRITERIA

The review included all randomized controlled trials identified in the literature search that evaluated a male nonlatex condom made of polyurethane film or synthetic elastomers in comparison with a latex condom.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We evaluated all titles and abstracts located in the literature searches for inclusion in the review. Two reviewers independently extracted data from the identified studies. We entered and analyzed data with RevMan 4.1. Peto odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for the outcomes contraceptive efficacy, condom breakage and slippage, discontinuation of use, safety and user preference. The number of condoms, men, or women was used as the denominator for the ORs. Contraceptive efficacy, early discontinuation, and safety outcomes were also measured with survival analysis techniques and entered into "Additional tables."

MAIN RESULTS

While the eZ.on condom did not protect against pregnancy as well as its latex comparison condom, no differences were found in the typical-use efficacy in the comparisons between the Avanti and the Standard Tactylon and their latex counterparts. The nonlatex condoms were associated with higher rates of clinical breakage than their latex comparison condoms. The statistically significant odds ratios for clinical breakage for the nonlatex condoms versus their latex comparisons ranged from 2.6 (95% CI: 1.6 to 4.3) to 5.0 (95% CI: 3.6 to 6.8). Few adverse events were reported. In almost all of the comparisons, substantial proportions of participants preferred the nonlatex condom or reported that they would recommend its use to others.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Although the nonlatex condoms were associated with higher rates of clinical breakage than their latex comparison condoms, the new condoms still provide an acceptable alternative for those with allergies, sensitivities or preferences that might prevent the consistent use of latex condoms. The contraceptive efficacy of the nonlatex condoms requires more research.