Mail-Order Condom and Safer Sex Delivery Programs Among Northeastern and Southern Colleges: Utilization, Assessment, and Implications for Structural-Level Interventions within University Settings

Background: According to national assessments of university condom distribution programs, the mean number of condoms given to students is approximately one condom/student/year. In addition, previous studies indicated women are more embarrassed to purchase condoms. To increase condom availability on campus, mail-order condom and safer sex product delivery programs were implemented over a three year time period at a Northeastern University and four month pilot period at a Southern University.

Methods: Students at each institution ordered condoms and safer sex products online through a university-sponsored website and items arrived within seven days. Packets also included information about condom use, STD testing, and local sexual health resources. Among both schools, students who participated in the program were sent a web-based evaluation survey at the end of the semester with 874 participants responding.

Results: Over a three year time period, the Northeastern University received 5,031 orders for 24,125 condoms and 5,149 orders for safer sex products. During the pilot semester, the Southern university received 936 orders for 12,717 condoms and 3,578 packets of lubricant. The majority of the participants were Caucasian women who identified as heterosexual. Approximately three-quarters (75.4%) of students used the condoms they received with the remainder planning to use them or give them to their peers. Nearly all (98%) felt the condom program was convenient, 96% felt comfortable using the system, and 95% reported the program made it easier to practice safer sex.

Conclusions: The present study is the first investigation to assess student opinions and safer sex behaviors associated with condom distribution programs at colleges and universities in different regions. Results indicate that both men and women found the program was easy to use and more convenient than other campus health services. Results have implications for service benchmarks and other structural-level interventions conducted at colleges and universities.