Table 2.
Demographic and behavioral characteristics of qualitative interview participants (n = 25) by treatment group, Kisumu Combined Ring Study, 2019.
| n (%) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TFV/LNG IVR (n = 10) | TFV-only IVR (n = 10) | Placebo IVR (n = 5) | Total (N = 25) | |
| Screening visit characteristic | ||||
| Age (mean (SD)) | 21.9 (3.0) | 26.6 (5.5) | 23.8 (4.8) | 24.2 (4.8) |
| Highest level of education completed | ||||
| None | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (20.0) | 1 (4.0) |
| Primary school | 0 (0.0) | 1 (10.0) | 1 (20.0) | 2 (8.0) |
| Some secondary school | 1 (10.0) | 4 (40.0) | 0 (0.0) | 5 (20.0) |
| Secondary school | 8 (80.0) | 3 (30.0) | 2 (40.0) | 13 (52.0) |
| College/university | 1 (10.0) | 2 (20.0) | 1 (20.0) | 4 (16.0) |
| Current relationship status | ||||
| Single/never married | 8 (80.0) | 6 (60.0) | 4 (80.0) | 18 (72.0) |
| Married/living as married | 2 (20.0)a | 3 (30.0) | 1 (20.0) | 6 (24.0) |
| Divorced/separated | 0 (0.0) | 1 (10.0) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (4.0) |
| Widowed | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) |
| Sexually active in the past 3 months | ||||
| Yes | 7 (70.0) | 6 (60.0) | 3 (60.0) | 16 (64.0) |
| No | 2 (20.0) | 4 (40.0) | 2 (40.0) | 8 (32.0) |
| No Response | 1 (10.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (4.0) |
| Main or steady sexual partner in the past 3 months | ||||
| Yes | 8 (80.0) | 7 (70.0) | 5 (100.0) | 20 (80.0) |
| No | 2 (20.0) | 3 (30.0) | 0 (0.0) | 5 (20.0) |
| Currently lives with a sexual partner | ||||
| Yes | 2 (20.0) | 2 (20.0) | 0 (0.0) | 4 (16.0) |
| No | 8 (80.0) | 8 (80.0) | 5 (100.0) | 21 (84.0) |
| Ever been pregnant | ||||
| Yes | 4 (40.0) | 6 (60.0) | 4 (80.0) | 14 (56.0) |
| No | 6 (60.0) | 4 (40.0) | 1 (20.0) | 11 (44.0) |
| Contraceptive use in the past 6 months | ||||
| None | 8 (80.0) | 9 (90.0) | 5 (100.0) | 22 (88.0) |
| Oral Contraception | 1 (10.0) | 1 (10.0) | 0 (0.0) | 2 (8.0) |
| Male Condom | 2 (20.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 2 (8.0) |
| Days of IVR use (mean (SD)) | 54.7 (29.9) | 76.3 (27.0) | 73.0 (20.6) | 67.0 (28.0) |
| IVR discontinuation before end of studyb | ||||
| Yes | 3 (30.0) | 2 (20.0) | 0 (0.0) | 5 (20.0) |
| No | 7 (70.0) | 8 (80.0) | 5 (100.0) | 20 (80.0) |
TFV = tenofovir; LNG = levonorgestrel; IVR = intravaginal ring.
a
One participant reported that she was in a polygamous marriage.
b
Multiple clinical indications for early IVR removal may have been present for a participant. Reasons included menorrhagia related to IVR use, symptomatic BV, recurrent dislodgement of the IVR for one participant, vulvovaginitis, and pregnancy (clinical outcomes data published elsewhere).