Measuring a Critical Component of Contraceptive Decision Making: The Contraceptive Concerns and Beliefs Scale.

INTRODUCTION: Concerns about safety and side effects from contraceptives are widespread and related to reluctance to use them. Measuring these concerns is an essential component of understanding contraceptive decision-making and guiding contraceptive and interpregnancy clinical care. METHODS: We used qualitative research and item response theory to develop and test a psychometric instrument to measure contraceptive concerns and beliefs. We developed 55 candidate scale items and tested them among 572 adolescents and adults across nine California healthcare facilities in 2019-2020. We derived a 6-item scale and assessed differences by age and social determinants of health with multivariable regression. RESULTS: In qualitative data, participants voiced both concerns and positive beliefs about contraception. Quantitative survey respondents were aged 21 years on average, and 24% were parous. Over half (54%) worried contraception has dangerous side effects, and 39% worried it is unnatural. The mean Contraceptive Concerns score, increasing with higher concerns, was 1.85 (SD: 1.00, range 0-4, α = 0.81). Items fit a partial credit item response model and met prespecified criteria for internal structure validity. Contraceptive use declined with increasing Concerns score (adjusted prevalence ratio [aPR] = 0.81 [0.72-0.92]). Scores were elevated among Black (mean: 2.06; aß = 0.34 [0.09, 0.59]) and Multiracial or other race (2.11; aß = 0.34 [0.02, 0.66]) respondents vs. White (1.66), but not Latinx respondents (1.81; aß = 0.11 [- 0.11, 0.33]). Scores were also elevated among participants with lower maternal education (high school/Associate's 1.89 versus college 1.60; aß = 0.28 [0.04, 0.53]). DISCUSSION: The psychometrically robust Concerns instrument can be used in research to measure autonomous contraceptive decision-making and to design person-centered care.

Perceived Access to Contraception via Telemedicine Among Young Adults: Inequities by Food and Housing Insecurity.

BACKGROUND: Telemedicine expanded rapidly during the COVID-19 pandemic, including for contraceptive services. Data are needed to understand whether young people can access telemedicine for contraception, especially in underserved populations. OBJECTIVE: To compare young people's perceived access to telemedicine visits for contraception during the COVID-19 pandemic by food and housing insecurity. DESIGN: Supplementary study to a cluster randomized controlled trial in 25 community colleges in California and Texas. Online surveys were administered May 2020 to April 2021. Mixed-effects logistic regression models with random effects for site were used to examine differences in access to contraception through telemedicine by food and housing insecurity status, controlling for key sociodemographic characteristics, including race/ethnicity, non-English primary language, health insurance status, and state of residence, and contraceptive method used. PARTICIPANTS: 1,414 individuals assigned female at birth aged 18-28. MAIN MEASURES: Survey measures were used to capture how difficult it would be for a participant to have a telemedicine visit (phone or video) for contraception. KEY RESULTS: Twenty-nine percent of participants were food insecure, and 15% were housing insecure. Nearly a quarter (24%) stated that it would be difficult to have a phone or video visit for contraception. After accounting for sociodemographic factors and type of method used, food insecure (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.17; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.62-2.91) and housing insecure (aOR, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.13-2.33) participants were significantly more likely to report that it would be difficult to use telemedicine for contraception during the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: Underserved patients are those who could benefit most from the expansion of telemedicine services, yet our findings show that young people experiencing basic needs insecurity perceive the greatest difficulty accessing these services for essential reproductive care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03519685.

Agency in Contraceptive Decision-Making in Patient Care: a Psychometric Measure.

BACKGROUND: Patient agency in contraceptive decision-making is an essential component of reproductive autonomy. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to develop a psychometrically robust measure of patient contraceptive agency in the clinic visit, as a measure does not yet exist. DESIGN: For scale development, we generated and field tested 54 questionnaire items, grounded in qualitative research. We used item response theory-based methods to select and evaluate scale items for psychometric performance. We iteratively examined model fit, dimensionality, internal consistency, internal structure validity, and differential item functioning to arrive at a final scale. PARTICIPANTS: A racially/ethnically diverse sample of 338 individuals, aged 15-34 years, receiving contraceptive care across nine California clinics in 2019-2020. MAIN MEASURES: Contraceptive Agency Scale (CAS) of patient agency in preventive care. KEY RESULTS: Participants were 20.5 mean years, with 36% identifying as Latinx, 26% White, 20% Black, 10% Asian/Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander. Scale items covered the domains of freedom from coercion, non-judgmental care, and active decision-making, and loaded on to a single factor, with a Cronbach's α of 0.80. Item responses fit a unidimensional partial credit item response model (weighted mean square statistic within 0.75-1.33 for each item), met criteria for internal structure validity, and showed no meaningful differential item functioning. Most participants expressed high agency in their contraceptive visit (mean score 9.6 out of 14). One-fifth, however, experienced low agency or coercion, with the provider wanting them to use a specific method or to make decisions for them. Agency scores were lowest among Asian/Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander participants (adjusted coefficient: -1.5 [-2.9, -0.1] vs. White) and among those whose mothers had less than a high school education (adjusted coefficient; -2.1 [-3.3, -0.8] vs. college degree or more). CONCLUSIONS: The Contraceptive Agency Scale can be used in research and clinical care to reinforce non-coercive service provision as a standard of care.

Contraceptive preferences and adoption following female genital fistula surgery in Uganda: a mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: Female genital fistula, largely caused by prolonged obstructed labour, is treated by surgical repair. Preventing pregnancy for a minimum period post-repair is recommended to ensure adequate healing and optimize post-repair outcomes. METHODS: We examined contraceptive preferences and use among Ugandan fistula patients (n = 60) in the year following genital fistula surgery using mixed-methods. Sexual activity, contraceptive use and pregnancy status were recorded quarterly for 12 months after surgery. In-depth interviews among purposively selected participants (n = 30) explored intimate relationships, sexual experiences, reproductive intentions, and contraceptive use. RESULTS: Median participant age was 28 years and almost half (48%) were married or living with partners. Counselling was provided to 97% of participants on delaying sexual intercourse, but only 59% received counselling on contraception. Sexual activity was reported by 32% after 6 months and 50% after 12 months. Eighty-three percent reported not trying for pregnancy. Among sexually active participants, contraceptive use was low at baseline (36%) but increased to 73% at 12 months. Six (10%) women became pregnant including two within 3 months post-repair. Interview participants who desired children immediately were young, had fewer children, experienced stillbirth at fistula development, and felt pressure from partners. Women adopted contraception to fully recover from fistula surgery and avoid adverse outcomes. Others simply preferred to delay childbearing. Reasons cited for not adopting contraception included misconceptions related to their fertility and to contraceptive methods and insufficient or unclear healthcare provider advice on their preferred methods. CONCLUSIONS: A high proportion of patients were not counselled by healthcare providers on contraception. Provision of comprehensive patient-centred contraceptive counselling at the time of fistula surgery and beyond is important for patients to optimize healing from fistula and minimize recurrence, as well as to meet their own reproductive preferences.

The role of informational support from women's social networks on antenatal care initiation: qualitative evidence from pregnant women in Uganda.

BACKGROUND: Early and appropriate use of antenatal care services is critical for reducing maternal and neonatal mortality and morbidity. Yet most women in sub-Saharan Africa, including Uganda, do not seek antenatal care until later during pregnancy. This qualitative study explored pregnant women's reliance on social ties for information about initiation of antenatal care. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured, in-depth interviews with 30 pregnant women seeking their first antenatal care visit at Kawempe Referral Hospital in Kampala, Uganda. Recruitment was done purposively to obtain variation by parity and whether women currently had a male partner. Study recruitment occurred from August 25th 2020 - October 26th, 2020. We used thematic analysis following a two-stage coding process, with both deductive and inductive codes. Deductive codes followed the key domains of social network and social support theory. RESULTS: We found that the most important source of information about antenatal care initiation was these women's mothers. Other sources included their mothers-in-law, female elders including grandmothers, and male partners. Sisters and female friends were less influential information sources about antenatal initiation. One of the primary reasons for relying on their own mothers, mothers-in-law, and elder women was due to these women's lived experience with pregnancy and childbirth. Trust in the relationship was also an important factor. Some pregnant women were less likely to rely on their sisters or female friends, either due to lack of trust or these women's lack of experience with pregnancy and childbirth. The advice that pregnant women received from their mothers and others on the ideal timing for antenatal care initiation varied significantly, including examples of misinformation about when to initiate antenatal care. Pregnant women seemed less likely to delay care when more than one social tie encouraged early antenatal care. CONCLUSIONS: Educating women's social networks, especially their mothers, mothers-in-law, and community elders, about the importance of early antenatal care initiation is a promising avenue for encouraging pregnant women to seek care earlier in pregnancy.

Assessing differences in contraceptive provision through telemedicine among reproductive health providers during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Providers faced challenges in maintaining patient access to contraceptive services and public health safety during the COVID-19 pandemic. Due to increased barriers to care, providers increasingly used telemedicine for contraceptive care, curbside services, mail-order pharmacies, and on-line or home delivery of contraceptive methods, including self-administration of subcutaneous depo medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA-SQ). To better understand how reproductive health providers adapted service provision during the pandemic, this study assessed clinical practice changes and strategies providers adopted throughout the United States to maintain contraceptive care, particularly when clinics closed on-site, and the challenges that remained in offering contraceptive services, especially to marginalized patient populations. METHODS: We surveyed U.S. providers and clinic staff (n = 907) in April 2020-January 2021, collecting data on contraceptive service delivery challenges and adaptations, including telemedicine. We assessed clinical practice changes with multivariate regression analyses using generalized linear models with a Poisson distribution and cluster robust standard errors, adjusting for clinic patient volume, practice setting, region, Title X funding, and time of survey. RESULTS: While 80% of providers reported their clinic remained open, 20% were closed on-site. Providers said the pandemic made it more difficult to offer the full range of contraceptive methods (65%), contraceptive counseling (61%) or to meet the needs of patients in marginalized communities (50%). While only 11% of providers offered telemedicine pre-pandemic, most offered telemedicine visits (79%) during the pandemic. Some used mail-order pharmacies (35%), curbside contraceptive services (22%), and DMPA-SQ for self-administration (10%). Clinics that closed on-site were more likely to use mail-order pharmacies (aRR 1.83, 95% CI [1.37-2.44]) and prescribe self-administered DMPA-SQ (aRR 3.85, 95% CI [2.40-6.18]). Clinics closed on-site were just as likely to use telemedicine as those that remained open. Among clinics using telemedicine, those closed on-site continued facing challenges in contraceptive service provision. CONCLUSIONS: Clinics closing on-site were just as likely to offer telemedicine, but faced greater challenges in offering contraceptive counseling and the full range of contraceptive methods, and meeting the needs of marginalized communities. Maintaining in-person care for contraceptive services, in spite of staffing shortages and financial difficulties, is an important objective during and beyond the pandemic.

Delayed Visits for Contraception Due to Concerns Regarding Pelvic Examination Among Women with History of Intimate Partner Violence.

BACKGROUND: Concern regarding pelvic examinations may be more common among women experiencing intimate partner violence. OBJECTIVE: We examined women's attitudes towards pelvic examination with history of intimate partner violence (pressured to have sex, or verbal, or physical abuse). DESIGN: Secondary analysis of data from a cluster randomized trial on contraceptive access. PARTICIPANTS: Women aged 18-25 were recruited at 40 reproductive health centers across the USA (2011-2013). MAIN MEASURES: Delays in clinic visits for contraception and preference to avoid pelvic examinations, by history of ever experiencing pressured sex, verbal, or physical abuse from a sexual partner, reported by frequency (never, rarely, sometimes, often). We used multivariable logistic regression with generalized estimating equations for clustered data. KEY RESULTS: A total of 1490 women were included. Ever experiencing pressured sex was reported by 32.4% of participants, with 16.5% reporting it rarely, 12.1% reporting it sometimes, and 3.8% reporting it often. Ever experiencing verbal abuse was reported by 19.4% and physical abuse by 10.2% of participants. Overall, 13.2% of participants reported ever having delayed going to the clinic for contraception to avoid having a pelvic examination, and 38.2% reported a preference to avoid pelvic examinations. In multivariable analysis, women reporting that they experienced pressured sex often had significantly higher odds of delaying a clinic visit for birth control (aOR 3.10 95% CI 1.39-6.84) and for reporting a preference to avoid pelvic examinations (aOR 2.91 95% CI 1.57-5.40). We found no associations between delay of clinic visits or preferences to avoid a pelvic examination and verbal or physical abuse. CONCLUSIONS: History of pressured sex from an intimate partner is common. Among women who have experienced pressured sex, concern regarding pelvic examinations is a potential barrier to contraception. Communicating that routine pelvic examinations are no longer recommended by professional societies could potentially reduce barriers and increase preventive healthcare visits.

The association between men's family planning networks and contraceptive use among their female partners: an egocentric network study in Madagascar.

BACKGROUND: Ensuring women have information, support and access to family planning (FP) services will allow women to exercise their reproductive autonomy and reduce maternal mortality, which remains high in countries such as Madagascar. Research shows that women's social networks - their ties with partners, family members, friends, and providers - affect their contraceptive use. Few studies have considered the role of men's social networks on women's contraceptive use. Insofar as women's contraceptive use may be influenced by their male partners, women's contraceptive use may also be affected by their partner's social networks. Men may differ by the types of ties they rely on for information and advice about FP. It is unknown whether differences in the composition of men's FP networks matter for couples' contraceptive use. This study assessed the association between men's FP networks and couples' contraceptive use. METHODS: This egocentric network study was conducted among married/partnered men (n = 178) in rural Madagascar. Study participants listed who they relied on for FP information and advice, including health providers and social ties. They provided ties' gender, age, relationship, and perceived support of contraceptive use. The primary outcome was couples' contraceptive use, and explanatory variables included FP networks and their composition (no FP network, social-only network, provider-only network, and mixed network of social and provider ties). Analyses used generalized linear models specifying a Poisson distribution, with covariate adjustment and cluster robust standard errors. RESULTS: Men who had FP networks were 1.9 times more likely to use modern contraception as a couple compared to men with no FP network (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.64-2.52; p ≤ 0.001). Compared to men with no FP network, men were more likely to use modern contraception if they had a social-only network, relative risk (RR) = 2.10 (95% CI, 1.65-2.68; p ≤ 0.001); a provider-only network, RR = 1.80 (95% CI, 1.54-2.11; p ≤ 0.001); or a mixed network, RR = 2.35 (95% CI, 1.97-2.80; p ≤ 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Whether men have a FP network, be it provider or social ties, distinguishes if couples are using contraception. Interventions should focus on reaching men not only through providers but also through their social ties to foster communication and support for contraceptive use.

Mental health among outpatient reproductive health care providers during the US COVID-19 epidemic.

INTRODUCTION: Both inpatient and outpatient providers may be at increased risk of stress, anxiety and depression from their roles as health providers during the COVID-19 epidemic. This study explores how the US COVID-19 epidemic has increased feelings of stress, anxiety and depression among outpatient reproductive health providers. METHODS: We conducted a survey with open-ended responses among outpatient reproductive health providers across the U.S. engaged in contraceptive care to collect data on their experiences with stress, anxiety and depression during the COVID-19 epidemic. The study population included physicians, nurses, social workers, and other health professions [n = 288]. Data were collected from April 21st-June 24th 2020. We used content analysis of free text responses among providers reporting increased stress, anxiety or depression. RESULTS: Two-thirds (184) of providers reported increased stress and one-third (96) reported increased anxiety or depression related to care provision during the COVID-19 epidemic. The major sources of stress, anxiety and depression were due to patient care, worry about becoming infected or infecting family members, work- and home-related concerns, experiencing provider burnout, and fear of the unknown. Concerns about quality of patient care, providers' changing responsibilities, lack of personal protective equipment, and difficulty coping with co-worker illness and absence all contributed to provider stress and anxiety. Worries about unemployment and childcare responsibilities were also highlighted. Providers attributed their stress, anxiety or depression to feeling overwhelmed, being unable to focus, lacking sleep, and worrying about the unknown. CONCLUSIONS: US outpatient providers are experiencing significant stress, anxiety, and depression during the US COVID-19 epidemic. Policy and programmatic responses are urgently needed to address the widespread adverse mental health consequences of this epidemic on outpatient providers, including reproductive health providers, across the US. Both inpatient and outpatient providers may be at increased risk of stress, anxiety and depression from their roles as health providers during the COVID-19 epidemic. This study explores how the US COVID-19 epidemic has increased feelings of stress, anxiety and depression among outpatient reproductive health providers across the US. We conducted a survey from April 21st to June 24th, 2020 among outpatient reproductive health providers, including physicians, nurses, social workers and other health professions. We asked open-ended questions to understand why providers reported increased stress, anxiety and/or depression. Two-thirds (184) of providers reported increased stress and one-third (96) reported increased anxiety or depression from care provision during the COVID-19 epidemic. Major sources of stress, anxiety and depression were due to patient care, worry about becoming infected or infecting family members, work- and home-related concerns, experiencing provider burnout, and fear of the unknown. Concerns about quality of patient care, providers' changing responsibilities, lack of personal protective equipment, and difficulty coping with co-worker illness and absence all contributed to provider stress and anxiety. Worries about unemployment and childcare responsibilities were also highlighted. Providers attributed their stress, anxiety or depression to feeling overwhelmed, being unable to focus, lacking sleep, and worrying about the unknown. This study highlights that US outpatient reproductive health providers are experiencing significant stress, anxiety, and depression during the US COVID-19 epidemic. Policy and programmatic responses are urgently needed to address the widespread adverse mental health consequences of this epidemic on outpatient providers, including reproductive health providers, across the US.

Implementation science: Scaling a training intervention to include IUDs and implants in contraceptive services in primary care.

Building capacity for contraceptive services in primary care settings, including for intrauterine devices (IUDs) and implants, can help to broaden contraceptive access across the US. Following a randomized trial in family planning clinics, we brought a provider training intervention to other clinical settings including primary care in all regions. This implementation science study evaluates a national scale-up of a contraceptive training intervention to varied practice settings from 2013 to 2019 among 3216 clinic staff serving an estimated 1.6 million annual contraceptive patients. We measured providers' knowledge and clinical practice changes regarding IUDs and implants using survey data. We estimated the overall intervention effect, and its relative effectiveness in primary care settings, with generalized estimating equations for clustered data. Patient-centered counseling improved, along with comfort with method provision and removal. Provider knowledge increased (p < 0.001), as did evidence-based counseling for IUDs (aOR 3.3 95% CI 2.8-3.9) and implants (aOR 3.5, 95% CI 3.0-4.1), and clinician competency in copper and levonorgestrel IUDs (aORs 1.8-2.6 95% CIs 1.5-3.2) and implants (aOR 2.4 95% CI 2.0-2.9). While proficiency was lower initially in primary care, gains were significant and at times greater than in Planned Parenthood health clinics. This intervention was effectively scaled, including in primary care settings with limited prior experience with these methods. Recent changes to Title X family planning funding rules exclude several large family planning providers, shifting greater responsibility to primary care and other settings. Scaling effective contraceptive interventions is one way to ensure capacity to offer patients full contraceptive services.

Exploring young women's reasons for adopting intrauterine or oral emergency contraception in the United States: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: The recent focus on increasing access to long-acting reversible contraceptive methods has often overlooked the diverse reasons why women may choose less effective methods even when significant access barriers have been removed. While the copper intrauterine device (IUD) is considered an acceptable alternative to emergency contraception pills (ECPs), it is unclear to what extent low rates of provision and use are due to patient preferences versus structural access barriers. This study explores factors that influence patients' choice between ECPs and the copper IUD as EC, including prior experiences with contraception and attitudes toward EC methods, in settings where both options are available at no cost. METHODS: We telephone-interviewed 17 patients seeking EC from three San Francisco Bay Area youth-serving clinics that offered the IUD as EC and ECPs as standard practice, regarding their experiences choosing an EC method. We thematically coded all interview transcripts, then summarized the themes related to reasons for choosing ECPs or the IUD as EC. RESULTS: Ten participants left their EC visit with ECPs and seven with the IUD as EC option. Women chose ECPs because they were familiar and easily accessible. Reasons for not adopting the copper IUD included having had prior negative experiences with the IUD, concerns about its side effects and the placement procedure, and lack of awareness about the copper IUD. Women who chose the IUD as EC did so primarily because of its long-term efficacy, invisibility, lack of hormones, longer window of post-coital utility, and a desire to not rely on ECPs. Women who chose the IUD as EC had not had prior negative experiences with the IUD, had already been interested in the IUD, and were ready and able to have it placed that day. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights that women have varied and well-considered reasons for choosing each EC method. Both ECPs and the copper IUD are important and acceptable EC options, each with their own features offering benefits to patients. Efforts to destigmatize repeated use of ECPs and validate women's choice of either EC method are needed to support women in their EC method decision-making.

Educating men about vaginal microbicides: considerations from Kenya.

Men desire to be involved in their partner's decision-making about vaginal microbicide use. This coincides with women's desire to inform male partners about their microbicide use. Educating men about microbicides may enhance acceptability and generate critical support for the female participants of microbicide trials. In this multiphase mixed-methods study, we adapted an educational intervention on vaginal microbicides and tested it among men (n = 45) to determine its effect on men's knowledge regarding HIV/STI, vaginal microbicides and microbicide trials. We also conducted focus group discussions (FGDs) with the female partners (K = 3, n = 43) of the study participants and community representatives (K = 2, n = 24) to obtain their views on male partner microbicide education. We analysed FGD data for key themes using content analysis. HIV and vaginal microbicide knowledge scores increased significantly among men after the educational intervention. Both women and men highly supported male partner microbicide education, in the context of existing gender relations, to increase men's understanding about microbicides, promote adherence and help women gain their partners' trust. Complex gender dynamics should be considered when designing male partner educational interventions to improve acceptability and the use of microbicides and other female-initiated HIV prevention methods.

Training contraceptive providers to offer intrauterine devices and implants in contraceptive care: a cluster randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: US unintended pregnancy rates remain high, and contraceptive providers are not universally trained to offer intrauterine devices and implants to women who wish to use these methods. OBJECTIVE: We sought to measure the impact of a provider training intervention on integration of intrauterine devices and implants into contraceptive care. STUDY DESIGN: We measured the impact of a continuing medical education-accredited provider training intervention on provider attitudes, knowledge, and practices in a cluster randomized trial in 40 US health centers from 2011 through 2013. Twenty clinics were randomly assigned to the intervention arm; 20 offered routine care. Clinic staff participated in baseline and 1-year surveys assessing intrauterine device and implant knowledge, attitudes, and practices. We used a difference-in-differences approach to compare changes that occurred in the intervention sites to changes in the control sites 1 year later. Prespecified outcome measures included: knowledge of patient eligibility for intrauterine devices and implants; attitudes about method safety; and counseling practices. We used multivariable regression with generalized estimating equations to account for clustering by clinic to examine intervention effects on provider outcomes 1 year later. RESULTS: Overall, we surveyed 576 clinic staff (314 intervention, 262 control) at baseline and/or 1-year follow-up. The change in proportion of providers who believed that the intrauterine device was safe was greater in intervention (60% at baseline to 76% at follow-up) than control sites (66% at both times) (adjusted odds ratio, 2.48; 95% confidence interval, 1.13-5.4). Likewise, for the implant, the proportion increased from 57-77% in intervention, compared to 61-65% in control sites (adjusted odds ratio, 2.57; 95% confidence interval, 1.44-4.59). The proportion of providers who believed they were experienced to counsel on intrauterine devices also increased in intervention (53-67%) and remained the same in control sites (60%) (adjusted odds ratio, 1.89; 95% confidence interval, 1.04-3.44), and for the implant increased more in intervention (41-62%) compared to control sites (48-50%) (adjusted odds ratio, 2.30; 95% confidence interval, 1.28-4.12). Knowledge scores of patient eligibility for intrauterine devices increased at intervention sites (from 0.77-0.86) 6% more over time compared to control sites (from 0.78-0.80) (adjusted coefficient, 0.058; 95% confidence interval, 0.003-0.113). Knowledge scores of eligibility for intrauterine device and implant use with common medical conditions increased 15% more in intervention (0.65-0.79) compared to control sites (0.67-0.66) (adjusted coefficient, 0.15; 95% confidence interval, 0.09-0.21). Routine discussion of intrauterine devices and implants by providers in intervention sites increased significantly, 71-87%, compared to in control sites, 76-82% (adjusted odds ratio, 1.97; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-3.80). CONCLUSION: Professional guidelines encourage intrauterine device and implant competency for all contraceptive care providers. Integrating these methods into routine care is important for access. This replicable training intervention translating evidence into care had a sustained impact on provider attitudes, knowledge, and counseling practices, demonstrating significant changes in clinical care a full year after the training intervention.

Contraception after medication abortion in the United States: results from a cluster randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Understanding how contraceptive choices and access differ for women having medication abortions compared to aspiration procedures can help to identify priorities for improved patient-centered postabortion contraceptive care. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to investigate the differences in contraceptive counseling, method choices, and use between medication and aspiration abortion patients. STUDY DESIGN: This subanalysis examines data from 643 abortion patients from 17 reproductive health centers in a cluster, randomized trial across the United States. We recruited participants aged 18-25 years who did not desire pregnancy and followed them for 1 year. We measured the effect of a full-staff contraceptive training and abortion type on contraceptive counseling, choice, and use with multivariable regression models, using generalized estimating equations for clustering. We used survival analysis with shared frailty to model actual intrauterine device and subdermal implant initiation over 1 year. RESULTS: Overall, 26% of participants (n = 166) had a medication abortion and 74% (n = 477) had an aspiration abortion at the enrollment visit. Women obtaining medication abortions were as likely as those having aspiration abortions to receive counseling on intrauterine devices or the implant (55%) and on a short-acting hormonal method (79%). The proportions of women choosing to use these methods (29% intrauterine device or implant, 58% short-acting hormonal) were also similar by abortion type. The proportions of women who actually used short-acting hormonal methods (71% medication vs 57% aspiration) and condoms or no method (20% vs 22%) within 3 months were not significantly different by abortion type. However, intrauterine device initiation over a year was significantly lower after the medication than the aspiration abortion (11 per 100 person-years vs 20 per 100 person-years, adjusted hazard ratio, 0.50; 95% confidence interval, 0.28-0.89). Implant initiation rates were low and similar by abortion type (5 per 100 person-years vs 4 per 100 person-years, adjusted hazard ratio, 2.41; 95% confidence interval, 0.88-6.59). In contrast to women choosing short-acting methods, relatively few of those choosing a long-acting method at enrollment, 34% of medication abortion patients and 53% of aspiration abortion patients, had one placed within 3 months. Neither differences in health insurance nor pelvic examination preferences by abortion type accounted for lower intrauterine device use among medication abortion patients. CONCLUSION: Despite similar contraceptive choices, fewer patients receiving medication abortion than aspiration abortion initiated intrauterine devices over 1 year of follow-up. Interventions to help patients receiving medication abortion to successfully return for intrauterine device placement are warranted. New protocols for same-day implant placement may also help patients receiving medication abortion and desiring a long-acting method to receive one.

Barriers to postpartum contraception: differences among women based on parity and future fertility desires.

Timely use of contraception in the postpartum year is critical for pregnancy spacing, which protects a mother's health and improves her ability to care for children. This qualitative study explored contraceptive decision-making among postpartum women in Nairobi, Kenya, with a focus on accounts of how women overcame barriers to postpartum contraceptive use. Focus groups (n = 61) and in-depth interviews (n = 30) explored experiences, barriers and actual use of postpartum contraception. Data were analysed using framework analysis, a method that organises qualitative data into themes and then interprets the data by mapping participant characteristics to these themes. Contraceptive use among women who desired future fertility was hindered by fear of side-effects and concern for partner disapproval. However, women who were satisfied with their family size more easily overcame these barriers. Tailoring postpartum contraceptive counselling to both assuage the concerns of women who desire future fertility and address the long-term contraceptive needs of mothers who desire to stop child-bearing could play a role in reducing the unmet need for contraception. .

The impact of an IUD and implant intervention on dual method use among young women: Results from a cluster randomized trial.

Long-acting reversible contraceptives (LARCs) are highly effective at preventing pregnancy but do not protect against sexually transmitted infection (STI). Recent efforts to improve access to intrauterine devices (IUDs) and implants have raised concerns about STI prevention and reduced condom use, particularly among teenagers and young women. We evaluated whether a provider-targeted intervention to increase LARC access negatively impacted dual method use and STI incidence among an at-risk patient population. We conducted a cluster randomized trial in 40 reproductive health centers across the United States from May 2011 to May 2013. After training providers at 20 intervention sites, we recruited 1500 sexually-active women aged 18-25years who did not desire pregnancy and followed them for one year. We assessed intervention effects on dual method use, condom use and STI incidence, modeling dual method use with generalized estimating equations and STI incidence with Cox proportional hazard regression models, accounting for clustering. We found no differences between intervention and control groups in dual method use (14.3% vs. 14.4%, aOR 1.03, 95% CI 0.74-1.44) or condom use (30% vs. 31%, aOR 1.03, 95% CI 0.79-1.35) at last sex at one year. STI incidence was 16.5 per 100 person-years and did not differ between intervention and control groups (aHR 1.20, 95% CI 0.88-1.64). A provider training intervention to increase LARC access neither compromised condom use nor increased STI incidence among young women. Dual method use was very low overall, highlighting the need to bolster STI prevention efforts among adolescents and young women.

Reductions in pregnancy rates in the USA with long-acting reversible contraception: a cluster randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Unintended pregnancy remains a serious public health challenge in the USA. We assessed the effects of an intervention to increase patients' access to long-acting reversible contraceptives (LARCs) on pregnancy rates. METHODS: We did a cluster randomised trial in 40 reproductive health clinics across the USA in 2011-13. 20 clinics were randomly assigned to receive evidence-based training on providing counselling and insertion of intrauterine devices (IUDs) or progestin implants and 20 to provide standard care. Usual costs for contraception were maintained at all sites. We recruited women aged 18-25 years attending family planning or abortion care visits and not desiring pregnancy in the next 12 months. The primary outcome was selection of an IUD or implant at the clinic visit and secondary outcome was pregnancy within 12 months. We used generalised estimating equations for clustered data to measure the intervention effect on contraceptive selection, and used survival analysis to assess pregnancy rates. FINDINGS: Of 1500 women enrolled, more at intervention than control sites reported receiving counselling on IUDs or implants (565 [71%] of 797 vs 271 [39%] of 693, odds ratio 3·8, 95% CI 2·8-5·2) and more selected LARCs during the clinic visit (224 [28%] vs 117 [17%], 1·9, 1·3-2·8). The pregnancy rate was lower in intervention group than in the control group after family planning visits (7·9 vs 15·4 per 100 person-years), but not after abortion visits (26·5 vs 22·3 per 100 person-years). We found a significant intervention effect on pregnancy rates in women attending family planning visits (hazard ratio 0·54, 95% CI 0·34-0·85). INTERPRETATION: The pregnancy rate can be reduced by provision of counselling on long-term reversible contraception and access to devices during family planning counselling visits. FUNDING: William and Flora Hewlett Foundation.

Funding policies and postabortion long-acting reversible contraception: results from a cluster randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Almost one-half of women having an abortion in the United States have had a previous procedure, which highlights a failure to provide adequate preventive care. Provision of intrauterine devices and implants, which have high upfront costs, can be uniquely challenging in the abortion care setting. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a study of a clinic-wide training intervention on long-acting reversible contraception and examined the effect of the intervention, insurance coverage, and funding policies on the use of long-acting contraceptives after an abortion. STUDY DESIGN: This subanalysis of a cluster, randomized trial examines data from the 648 patients who had undergone an abortion who were recruited from 17 reproductive health centers across the United States. The trial followed participants 18-25 years old who did not desire pregnancy for a year. We measured the effect of the intervention, health insurance, and funding policies on contraceptive outcomes, which included intrauterine device and implant counseling and selection at the abortion visit, with the use of logistic regression with generalized estimating equations for clustering. We used survival analysis to model the actual initiation of these methods over 1 year. RESULTS: Women who obtained abortion care at intervention sites were more likely to report intrauterine device and implant counseling (70% vs 41%; adjusted odds ratio, 3.83; 95% confidence interval, 2.37-6.19) and the selection of these methods (36% vs 21%; adjusted odds ratio, 2.11; 95% confidence interval, 1.39-3.21). However, the actual initiation of methods was similar between study arms (22/100 woman-years each; adjusted hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% confidence interval, 0.51-1.51). Health insurance and funding policies were important for the initiation of intrauterine devices and implants. Compared with uninsured women, those women with public health insurance had a far higher initiation rate (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.18; 95% confidence interval, 1.31-3.62). Women at sites that provide state Medicaid enrollees abortion coverage also had a higher initiation rate (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.73; 95% confidence interval, 1.04-2.88), as did those at sites with state mandates for private health insurance to cover contraception (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.80; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-3.07). Few of the women with private insurance used it to pay for the abortion (28%), but those who did initiated long-acting contraceptive methods at almost twice the rate as women who paid for it themselves or with donated funds (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.94; 95% confidence interval, 1.10-3.43). CONCLUSIONS: The clinic-wide training increased long-acting reversible contraceptive counseling and selection but did not change initiation for abortion patients. Long-acting method use after abortion was associated strongly with funding. Restrictions on the coverage of abortion and contraceptives in abortion settings prevent the initiation of desired long-acting methods.

Public Funding for Contraception, Provider Training, and Use of Highly Effective Contraceptives: A Cluster Randomized Trial.

OBJECTIVES: We determined whether public funding for contraception was associated with long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARC) use when providers received training on these methods. METHODS: We evaluated the impact of a clinic training intervention and public funding on LARC use in a cluster randomized trial at 40 randomly assigned clinics across the United States (2011-2013). Twenty intervention clinics received a 4-hour training. Women aged 18 to 25 were enrolled and followed for 1 year (n = 1500: 802 intervention, 698 control). We estimated the effects of the intervention and funding sources on LARC initiation with Cox proportional hazards models with shared frailty. RESULTS: Women at intervention sites had higher LARC initiation than those at control (22 vs 18 per 100 person-years; adjusted hazard ratio [AHR] = 1.43; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.04, 1.98). Participants receiving care at clinics with Medicaid family planning expansion programs had almost twice the initiation rate as those at clinics without (25 vs 13 per 100 person-years; AHR = 2.26; 95% CI = 1.59, 3.19). LARC initiation also increased among participants with public (AHR = 1.56; 95% CI = 1.09, 2.22) but not private health insurance. CONCLUSIONS: Public funding and provider training substantially improve LARC access.

Why do women choose private over public facilities for family planning services? A qualitative study of post-partum women in an informal urban settlement in Kenya.

BACKGROUND: Nearly 40% of women in developing countries seek contraceptives services from the private sector. However, the reasons that contraceptive clients choose private or public providers are not well studied. METHODS: We conducted six focus groups discussions and 51 in-depth interviews with postpartum women (n = 61) to explore decision-making about contraceptive use after delivery, including facility choice. RESULTS: When seeking contraceptive services, women in this study preferred private over public facilities due to convenience and timeliness of services. Women avoided public facilities due to long waits and disrespectful providers. Study participants reported, however, that they felt more confident about the technical medical quality in public facilities than in private, and believed that private providers prioritized profit over safe medical practice. Women reported that public facilities offered comprehensive counseling and chose these facilities when they needed contraceptive decision-support. Provision of comprehensive counseling and screening, including side effects counseling and management, determined perception of quality. CONCLUSION: Women believed private providers offered the advantages of convenience, efficiency and privacy, though they did not consistently offer high-quality care. Quality-improvement of contraceptive care at private facilities could include technical standardization and accreditation. Development of support and training for side effect management may be an important intervention to improve perceived quality of care.