Adherence to Diaphragm Use for Infection Prevention: A Prospective Study of Female Sex Workers in Kenya

Table 5

Associations between consistent diaphragm use with “other” partners in previous 2 weeks and selected demographic characteristics and attitudes toward diaphragm use, Nairobi, Kenya, 2004-2005∗.

	No. of intervals with consistent use	No. of intervals without consistent use	OR	(95% CI)	OR	(95% CI)
			Bivariable model		Multivariable model†
Time-independent factors
Age
≤27 years	73	53	Referent
28–34 years	81	40	1.5	(0.8, 3.0)
≥35 years	79	36	1.6	(0.8, 3.3)
Marital status
Never married and cohabiting	64	36	Referent
Cohabiting, divorced or widowed	169	93	1.1	(0.6, 2.0)
Education completed
0–8 years	193	105	1.1	(0.5, 2.2)
9–12 years	40	24	Referent
Parity
0–1 children	45	43	Referent		Referent
≥2 children	188	86	2.2	(1.2, 4.0)	2.1	(1.1, 4.0)
Time-dependent factors
Study follow-up visit
2-month	75	53	Referent
4-month	78	44	1.2	(0.8, 1.8)
6-month	80	32	1.7	(1.1, 2.6)
All sex partners in past 2 weeks
1–5	116	54	1.5	(1.0, 2.1)
6–42	117	75	Referent
Coital acts with all partners in past 2 weeks
0–5 acts	41	14	2.1	(1.0, 4.3)
6–15 acts	129	72	1.2	(0.8, 2.0)
≥16 acts	63	42	Referent
Consistent condom use with “other” partners in past 2 weeks
Yes	165	70	2.0	(1.2, 3.4)	2.1	(1.2, 3.7)
No	68	59	Referent		Referent
Component 1 (Perceived partner support of diaphragm use)			1.2	(0.9, 1.4)
Component 2 (Attitudes toward study product attributes)			1.2	(1.0, 1.5)
Diaphragm  +  gel use is easier than condom use
Yes	189	79	2.5	(1.5, 4.1)	2.3	(1.4, 3.8)
No	44	50	Referent		Referent
Important that diaphragm use does not interrupt sex
Yes	222	117	2.9	(1.3, 6.5)	2.2	(1.0, 5.0)
No	11	12	Referent
No need for condoms is benefit of diaphragm  +  gel use
Yes	50	26	1.8	(1.0, 3.1)	2.3	(1.3, 4.2)
No	183	103	Referent		Referent

OR  =  odds ratio; CI  =  confidence interval
∗Analyzed with logistic regression model with generalized estimating equations based on 362 bimonthly study visits from 135 women who reported having sex with “other” partner during at least one bimonthly visit.
†Adjusted for all variables in column.
The following variables also were analyzed but were not associated with consistent diaphragm use: ethnicity (Kikuyu versus other), education ( ≤9 USD versus >9 USD), important to prevent pregnancy (not at all versus moderately or a lot); worry about pregnancy (not at all versus moderately or a lot); worry about HIV (not at all versus moderately or a lot); new sex partners in past 2 weeks (0 versus 1-2 versus ≥3); and the remaining factors that did not load in principal component analysis (listed in the footnote for Table 4).