Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Development and Validation of a Multidimensional Intravaginal Ring Acceptability Scale Among US Women and Their Male Partners

  • Ann Gottert
  • , Barbara A. Friedland
  • , Marlena Plagianos
  • , Brady Zieman
  • , Jessica M. Sales
  • , Jessica Atrio
  • , Shakti Shetty
  • , Caio Sant’Anna Marinho
  • , Nicole Roselli
  • , Ruth Merkatz
  • , Irene Bruce
  • , Lisa B. Haddad

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

Objective: Intravaginal rings (IVRs) are marketed or in development for contraception and other indications. We sought to develop and validate the IVR Acceptability Scale (IVR-AS) as a multidimensional, standardized tool for assessing IVR acceptability among end-users in the United States. Methods: Scale items reflect specific aspects of IVR acceptability for women and male partners. Response options range from 1 (not-at-all acceptable) to 5 (highly acceptable). We evaluated the IVR-AS within a randomized, crossover clinical trial of three nonmedicated silicone IVRs of differing external diameters (46, 56, 66 mm) in heterosexual couples who used each for ~30 days, then completed a self-administered survey. We conducted exploratory factor analysis and multivariable regression to assess convergent validity. Follow-up in-depth interviews with all participants explored scale salience. Results: Twenty-four couples participated (mean age 27). The final 19-item women's scale (Cronbach's alpha = 0.93) included six subdimensions: ease of use; experience and sensation; effect on sexual desire/engagement, and effect on vaginal sex (all alphas > 0.78). The final eight-item men's scale comprised two subdimensions: effect on sexual desire/engagement and effect on vaginal sex (all alphas > 0.89). For both sexes, higher overall/subdimension scores were consistently associated with favorable assessments of the ring, for example, ease of insertion/removal; adherence (most p < 0.001). The 46/56 mm IVRs had higher overall and subdimension scores than the 66 mm IVR (most p < 0.001). Qualitative reports reinforced the salience of scale subdimensions and item content. Conclusion: The IVR-AS captures multiple dimensions of IVR acceptability among women and their partners. The scales demonstrated excellent reliability and convergent validity. Further validation is warranted in future studies. Trial Registration: Clinical Trials.gov: NCT05128136. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05128136?intr=non-medicated%20silicone%20ring&rank=2.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)144-153
Number of pages10
JournalPerspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health
Volume57
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 2025

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

  1. SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being
    SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being

Keywords

  • HIV prevention
  • contraception
  • couples
  • end-user research
  • measurement
  • reproductive health
  • scale
  • vaginal ring

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Sociology and Political Science
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Development and Validation of a Multidimensional Intravaginal Ring Acceptability Scale Among US Women and Their Male Partners'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this