Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Cervical cap versus diaphragm for contraception.

M F Gallo1, D A Grimes, K F Schulz

  • 1Clinical Research Department, Family Health International, Research Triangle Park, PO Box 13950, North Carolina 27713, USA. mgallo@fhi.org

The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
|January 10, 2003
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Association Between Negative Pregnancy Desires and Recent Condomless Sex Among Couples in Vietnam.

Journal of sex research·2025
Same author

Effects of a Novel Erectogenic Condom on Men and Women's Sexual Pleasure: Randomized Controlled Trial.

Journal of sex research·2022
Same author

'Allocation concealment': the evolution and adoption of a methodological term.

Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine·2018
Same author

A catalogue of reporting guidelines for health research.

European journal of clinical investigation·2010
Same author

Improving the clarity and transparency of reporting health research: a shared obligation and responsibility.

Journal of dental research·2008
Same author

Immediate start of hormonal contraceptives for contraception.

The Cochrane database of systematic reviews·2008
Same journal

Interventions to prevent or cease electronic cigarette use in children and adolescents.

The Cochrane database of systematic reviews·2026
Same journal

Drugs to improve anaemia, quality of life, and physical function in people with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS).

The Cochrane database of systematic reviews·2026
Same journal

Interventions for smoking cessation in inpatient psychiatry settings.

The Cochrane database of systematic reviews·2026
Same journal

Mechanical thromboprophylaxis for preventing intradialytic hypotension in people undergoing maintenance haemodialysis.

The Cochrane database of systematic reviews·2026
Same journal

Prognostic models for predicting intensive care unit admission or mortality in critically ill adults not yet been admitted to the intensive care unit.

The Cochrane database of systematic reviews·2026
Same journal

Views and experiences of weight management for people living with mobility‑limiting conditions, intellectual disabilities or severe mental illness: a qualitative evidence synthesis.

The Cochrane database of systematic reviews·2026
See all related articles

The Prentif cervical cap is as effective as the diaphragm for pregnancy prevention, while the FemCap cervical cap is not. Both barrier methods are medically safe for users.

Area of Science:

  • Reproductive Health
  • Contraception
  • Clinical Trials

Background:

  • Cervical caps and diaphragms are vaginal barrier contraceptives covering the cervix.
  • They also serve as spermicide reservoirs.
  • Cervical caps are smaller and can be worn longer than diaphragms.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate contraceptive efficacy, safety, discontinuation, and acceptability of cervical caps versus diaphragms.
  • To compare the Prentif cap and FemCap to the diaphragm in randomized controlled trials.

Main Methods:

  • Searched multiple databases (MEDLINE, Popline, EMBASE, etc.) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
  • Included RCTs in any language comparing cervical caps with diaphragms.
  • Analyzed data using RevMan 4.1, calculating Peto odds ratios and confidence intervals.

Related Experiment Videos

Main Results:

  • Prentif cap demonstrated comparable pregnancy prevention to the diaphragm (p=0.39).
  • FemCap was less effective than the diaphragm; did not meet clinical equivalence criteria.
  • Prentif cap users had fewer vaginal ulcerations; FemCap users reported more blood in the device but fewer UTIs.
  • FemCap users were less likely to recommend the device or use it alone post-trial.

Conclusions:

  • The Prentif cervical cap is as effective as the diaphragm for pregnancy prevention.
  • The FemCap cervical cap is not as effective as the diaphragm.
  • Both cervical caps appear to be medically safe.