| The benefits of school-based condom availability: cross-sectional analysis of A comprehensive high school-based program. Wolk, L. & Rosenbaum R. |
1995, USA |
To analyze the benefits of a school-based condom availability program relative to the risks that such a program may incur. |
1,200 ninth through twelfth grade students |
Cross-sectional survey |
N/A |
1 year |
The benefit of the program by aiding a sexually-active student was found to be more than three times as great as the risk of encouraging a non-sexually active student to have sexual intercourse. |
Enablers
|
| • Active promotion and engagement of faculty advisors
|
|
Program being directed to sexually active students to achieve maximum benefit
|
|
Deterrents
|
| •
Assumption that condom availability provides sexual activities to adolescent
|
| •
Assumption that students still use substitute protection or having unprotected sex.
|
|
Gender difference – program needs to be directed towards females to enhance utilization
|
| Condom Availability in New York City Public High Schools: Relationships to condom use and sexual behavior. Guttmancher, S., et al. |
1997, USA |
To examine the impact of the condom availability program in New York city public high schools. |
7119 students from 12 selected NYC schools |
Cross-sectional survey and comparative study |
Condom availability program |
1 year |
There are equal rates of sexual activity but higher condom use in New York schools due to its availability.. |
Enablers
|
| •
Assembly of HIV/ AIDS Team to oversee the program.
|
| •
Teaching of minimum of 6 HIV/AIDS lessons in each grade.
|
| •
Designation of a resource room at school where condoms and HIV/AIDS materials are available.
|
| •
Provision of staff to the designated resource room (a male and a female).
|
| Making condoms available at school does not lead to increases in sexual activity |
•
Arrangement of HIV/AIDS information session with parents.
|
|
Deterrents
|
| •
Fear that condom’s availability will increase sexual activity.
|
| •
The role of parents vs. schools in matters of teen sexuality
|
| •
Schools may not be the place to reach adolescents at highest risk for HIV infection.
|
| Student Opinions of Condom Distribution at a Denver, Colorado, High School. Fanburg, J., Kaplan, D. & Naylor, K. |
1995, USA |
To assess students’ attitudes toward condom distribution in schools. |
931 high school students |
Survey |
N/A |
1 year |
85% of the students supported that condoms should be distributed in their school, and 76% believed making condoms more accessible would not change the frequency of sexual activity. |
Enablers
|
| •
Acceptability and approval of students on condom available at schools.
|
|
Deterrents
|
| •
Condom availability would encourage having sex.
|
| •
Handing out condoms is religiously wrong.
|
| •
Waste of resources.
|
| •
Embarrassing to get condoms at school.
|
| Impact of a High School Condom Availability Program on Sexual Attitudes and Behaviors. Schuster, M., et al. |
1998, USA |
To present evidence on the actual effects of condom availability programs on students’ attitudes and behavior |
1,945 students in grades 9–12 |
Survey on their sexual behavior and on related knowledge and attitudes |
Condom Availability Program |
1 year |
The students’ attitudes toward sex and condom use either remained the same between surveys or changed in a direction favoring less sexual behavior and greater risk prevention. |
Enablers
|
| •
Provision of baskets of condoms in classrooms and nurse’s office.
|
| •
Program publicized in school
|
| •
Integration of sexual behavior and risk prevention in health curriculum
|
| •
Implementation of AIDS awareness week
|
| •
No needed parental consent
|
|
Deterrents
|
| •
Gender difference- females being more hesitant in condom use.
|
| •
Assumption of increase sexual/ vaginal intercourse
|
| The impact of condom distribution in Seattle Schools on sexual behavior and condom use. Kirby, D., et al. |
1999, USA |
To measure the number of condoms that student obtained and subsequent changes in sexual behaviors and condom use. |
7179 students in pre intervention and 7893 in post intervention. |
School wide survey using pretest and posttest design. |
Condom availability program |
2 years |
Seattle students obtained an average of 4.6 condoms per year from baskets and vending machines available at schools. |
Enablers
|
| •
Provision of baskets of free condoms and vending machines with minimal pay located in reachable areas.
|
| •
Free information on abstinence, condom use and HIV prevention were also included in the baskets.
|
| •
No restrictions were placed on students obtaining condoms.
|
| •
Implementation of sex education program taught in semester-long health classes.
|
| •
Implementation of peer HIV education program.
|
|
Deterrent
|
| •
Notion that condom’s availability will increase sexual activity.
|
| Condom Availability Programs in Massachusetts High Schools: Relationships with Condom Use and Sexual Behavior. Blake, S., et al. |
2003, USA |
To determine whether relationships exist between the presence or absence of condom availability programs in Massachusetts high schools and adolescent sexual practices. |
4166 students |
Cross-sectional survey and comparative study |
Condom availability program |
1 year |
Sexual intercourse rates were not higher in schools where condoms were made available. The presence of a condom availability program was protective. |
Enablers
|
| •
State-level policy to promote public discussion is in placed.
|
| •
Public dialogue between board members, school administrators, faculty, parents, students and local community.
|
|
Deterrents
|
| •
Program awareness and visibility
|
| •
Structural and support barriers
|
| Improving the implementation of a condom availability program in Urban High Schools. De Rosa, C. et al. |
2012, USA |
To evaluate the implementation of the condom availability program on students’ awareness and acquisition of condoms. |
29,823 students |
Survey and comparative study |
Condom availability program |
4 years |
Awareness and acquisition of condoms increased significantly among intervention versus control schools. |
Enablers
|
| •
State-level policy on condom distribution at schools with mandatory and flexible components.
|
| •
Compliance and enhancement activities available in the schools.
|
|
Deterrent
|
| •
Low parental consent
|
| Feasibility and use of school-based condom availability programs in Tijuana, Mexico. Zellner JA, et al. |
2014, Mexico |
Describes the characteristics, degree of satisfaction, and gender differences among users of a CAP implemented in two high schools in Tijuana (BajaCalifornia, Mexico) |
570 students in two high schools in Tijuana, Mexico |
Survey |
CAP user cards and survey; repeat user survey |
2 years |
Kiosk users (N=570) were more likely to be male, young, and/or enrolled in a lower SES school. |
Enablers
|
| Most kiosk users were either sexually active or planning to have sex. |
•
Provision of kiosk distributing condoms
|
| Females were less likely to request condoms and to continue using the kiosk, but more likely to request information on other contraceptive methods. |
•
Setting up Information kiosks on the prevention of HIV and other STIs, pregnancy and contraception in school grounds
|
| •
Support from non-government organizations
|
| •
Provision of opportunity for adolescents to gather information about safe sex practices and to rehearse condom acquisition skills.
|
|
Deterrents
|
| •
Condom availability may be a means of initiating condom use and social skills training for youth who otherwise would be unlikely to request or obtain such assistance.
|