Search

To estimate the potential market for novel male contraceptives (NMCs) using United States National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG) data, 2015–2017. We described the market for NMCs via secondary analysis of the 2015–2017 NSFG's weighted male respondent data, utilizing surrogate markers for contraceptive switching (NSFG) and contraceptive discontinuation data from the Contraceptive CHOICE project. Potential NMC users included men relying on: (1) no methods or less effective methods but who reported that they would be "very upset" if they got someone pregnant, (2) permanent methods but who reported that they might still want more children, (3) a female partner's method that she might discontinue in the next year, (4) a male method even when his partner uses her own contraceptive. Of 3340 respondents—representing 55,890,830 sexually active, reproductive-age men—23.2% used no contraception at last intercourse, 15.8% condoms, 5.1% withdrawal, and 5.1% vasectomy. Among respondents relying solely on condoms, withdrawal, or no method, 19.7%, 3.8%, and 4.4% would be "very upset" if they got someone pregnant. For permanent contraceptive users, 17.3%−20.5% wanted another child. For men reliant on their partner's long-acting reversible or combined hormonal contraceptive, 12–17% and 45–51% of partners might discontinue their method. These data conservatively suggest that 13% or more than 7 million men would potentially use NMCs, rising to 15.5 million with less restrictive contraceptive switching criteria. Adjusting for pregnancy attitudes and likelihood of contraceptive switching, a substantial portion (between 7–15.5 million) of reproductive age men in the US are potential NMC users. The population of potential novel male contraceptive users extends beyond just users of condoms, withdrawal and vasectomy and should include couples practicing dual-partner contraception and female partners using contraceptive methods that they may become dissatisfied with and discontinue. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Opioid overdose mortality in the US has exceeded one million deaths over the last two decades. A regulated opioid supply may help prevent future overdose deaths by reducing exposure to the unregulated opioid supply. We examined the acceptability, delivery model preference, and anticipated effectiveness of different regulated opioid models among people in the Seattle area who inject opioids. We enrolled people who inject drugs in the 2022 Seattle-area National HIV Behavior Surveillance (NHBS) survey. Participants were recruited between July and December 2022 using respondent-driven sampling. Participants who reported injecting opioids (N = 453) were asked whether regulated opioids would be acceptable, their preferred model of receiving regulated opioids, and the anticipated change in individual overdose risk from accessing a regulated opioid supply. In total, 369 (81 %) participants who injected opioids reported that a regulated opioid supply would be acceptable to them. Of the 369 who found a regulated opioid supply to be acceptable, the plurality preferred a take-home model where drugs are prescribed (35 %), followed closely by a dispensary model that required no prescription (28 %), and a prescribed model where drugs need to be consumed on site (13 %), a model where no prescription is required and drugs can be accessed in a community setting with a one-time upfront payment was the least preferred model (5 %). Most participants (69 %) indicated that receiving a regulated opioid supply would be "a lot less risky" than their current supply, 20 % said, "a little less risky", 10 % said no difference, and 1 % said a little or a lot more risky. A regulated opioid supply would be acceptable to most participants, and participants reported it would greatly reduce their risk of overdose. As overdose deaths continue to increase in Washington state pragmatic and effective solutions that reduce exposure to unregulated drugs are needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]