Effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on contraceptive prescribing in general practice: a retrospective analysis of English prescribing data between 2019 and 2020.

OBJECTIVES: This paper looks at how contraceptive prescribing by General Practices in England was affected by the COVID-19pandemic and lockdown. It compares English prescribing data in April - June 2019, the year before COVID19, and April-June 2020, the first three months of 'lockdown'. DESIGN & SETTING: This paper is based on retrospective analysis of the English Prescribing Dataset which reports monthly on prescribed items from English General Practices. Data on all forms of prescribed contraceptive methods were extracted using BNF codes, and total quantities tabulated by method. To reach the total number of months of contraception provided, total quantities were divided or multiplied according the frequency with which the method is taken per month or the numbers of months of contraception provided. RESULTS: Prescription of the combined oral contraceptive pill reduced by 22% during the period of lockdown compared to the same three months in 2019. Prescriptions of Progestogen-Only pills remained stable. Prescription of long-acting methods reduced, with the greatest reductions in implants (76% reduction from pre-lockdown levels), intra-uterine systems (79% reduction from pre-lockdown levels) and intrauterine devices (76% reduction from pre-lockdown levels). CONCLUSIONS: The disruption of face-to-face contraceptive consultations in General Practice during a COVID-19 'lockdown' has resulted in a reduction in oestrogen -containing methods compared to progestogen-only methods, which require less face-to-face monitoring. Implant and intrauterine contraceptive device prescription reduced by three quarters over the first three months of lockdown, which has the potential to result in a rise in unintended pregnancies.

Effect of the Covid pandemic on progestogen-only and oestrogen-containing contraceptive prescribing in general practice: a retrospective analysis of English prescribing data.

OBJECTIVES: This paper looks at how trends in contraceptive prescribing by General Practices in England were affected by the Covid pandemic and lockdown. It compares English prescribing data from May 2014 to May 2021, including the period of 'lockdown', from April 20-June 20. DESIGN & SETTING: A retrospective analysis of the English Prescribing Dataset which reports monthly on prescribed items from English General Practices was carried out. Data on all forms of prescribed contraceptive methods were extracted using British National Formulary (BNF) codes, and total quantities tabulated by method, then transformed into 'months of contraception provided' by each method. RESULTS: Prescription of the combined oral contraceptive pill reduced by 22% during the period of lockdown compared to the same three months in 2019. Prescriptions of Progestogen-Only pills remained stable. This continued a trend in oral contraceptive prescribing evident from May14. Prescription of long-acting methods reduced during the period of lockdown, with the greatest reductions in implants (76% reduction from pre-lockdown levels), intra-uterine systems (79% reduction from pre-lockdown levels) and intrauterine devices (76% reduction from pre-lockdown levels). These rates of contraceptive provision recovered quickly after the period of lockdown ended. CONCLUSIONS: The disruption of face-to-face contraceptive consultations in General Practice during a Covid-19 'lockdown' has resulted in a reduction in oestrogen -containing methods compared to progestogen-only methods, which require less face-to-face monitoring. Implant and intrauterine contraceptive device prescription reduced by three quarters over the first three months of lockdown, but rebounded in the next year.

The views of postnatal women and midwives on midwives providing contraceptive advice and methods: a mixed method concurrent study.

BACKGROUND: Provision of contraception to women in the immediate postnatal period has been endorsed by professional bodies, to reduce the incidence of short inter-pregnancy intervals. This study examined the views of postnatal women and practising midwives regarding provision of contraceptive advice and contraceptive methods by midwives, in a region of the United Kingdom. METHODS: A mixed-method approach using qualitative interviews with midwives, and a postnatal survey followed by qualitative interviews with postnatal women, in five hospitals in the East of England. Twenty-one practising midwives and ten women were interviewed. Two hundred and twenty-seven women returned a survey. Survey data was analysed descriptively, augmented by Student's t-tests and Chi-squared tests to examine associations within the data. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and analysed guided by the phases of thematic analysis. RESULTS: Midwives and women supported the concept of increased midwifery provision of contraceptive advice, and provision of contraceptive methods in the postnatal period. Convenience and an established trusting relationship were reasons for preferring midwifery provision over visiting a doctor for contraception. The best time for detailed discussion was reported to be antenatal and community visits. The Progesterone-only-pill (POP) was the method, in which women indicated most interest postnatally. Concerns for midwives included the need for increased education on contraceptive methods and training in supplying these. Structural barriers to such provision were time pressures, low prioritisation of contraceptive training and disputes over funding. CONCLUSIONS: Women reported interest in midwives supplying contraceptive methods and expressed the view that this would be convenient and highly acceptable. Midwives are supportive of the concept of providing enhanced contraceptive advice and methods to women in their care, and believe that it would be advantageous for women. Institutional support is required to overcome structural barriers such as poor access to continuous professional development, and to allow contraceptive provision to be fully recognised as integral to the midwifery role, rather than a marginalised addition.

What is the evidence that can inform the implementation of a preceptorship scheme for general practice nurses, and what is the evidence for the benefits of such a scheme?: A literature review and synthesis.

OBJECTIVES: This is a literature review of the published evidence of the benefits and suggested structure of preceptorship programmes for General Practice Nursing, with the aim of informing General Practices and networks who are instituting preceptorship programmes. DESIGN & DATA SOURCES: A literature search was carried out in the CINAHL Plus database of English language papers from the year 2000-2019 using the search terms; (Precept* OR mentor*) AND ("community practice" OR "primary care" OR "general practice" OR "new GPN" OR "new general practice nurse" OR "nurse new to general practice" OR "induction GPN" or "GPN"). REVIEW METHOD: A literature review and narrative synthesis of the evidence. RESULTS: Our searches produced twelve papers. Seven papers reported on single preceptorship programmes in General Practice or primary care, with qualitative or quantitative evaluation of their effects. Three qualitative papers reported participant experience of preceptorship, or discussed the learning needs that preceptorship must address. Two literature reviews reported the evidence for preceptorship in General Practice or nurse practitioner programmes. CONCLUSION: The quality of the evidence on General Practice Nurse preceptorship is low. There is a lack of robust evidence on the effects, and the benefits. These should be evaluated as preceptorship programmes are implemented. The limited available evidence suggests that a structured preceptorship programme, of more than 4 months duration, which allows the development of peer-to-peer support, is a good model for General Practice Nurse preceptorship. The involvement of doctors and the wider practice team is essential for the success of such a programme. Preceptors require training and support in the role. General Practice Nurse preceptorship should support the development of existing professional competencies, including the ability to make real-time autonomous clinical decisions. The financial costs, and cost of time away from clinical care, should be ameliorated as far as possible, when instituting a national General Practice Nurse preceptorship programme.

Predictors of non-use of intrauterine contraception among women aged 18-49 years in a general practice setting in the UK.

OBJECTIVES: Our research examined the barriers to the uptake of intrauterine contraception (IUC) by women in a general practice (GP) setting in the UK. This study reports predictors of non-use of IUC in this context. DESIGN: We used a mixed method Qual/Quant approach in which the initial qualitative research provides a framework for subsequent larger quantitative surveys. Utilizing findings derived from 30 qualitative interviews, a quantitative survey was developed and distributed to a pragmatic sample of 1,195 women, aged 18-49 years, who were recruited through 32 participating GP practices in an area of England, UK. Outcome measures were percentage of attributes or responses in the sample and use or non-use of IUC. Results were analyzed using descriptive statistical analysis and binary logistic regression, using use/non-use as a binary response variable. RESULTS: Attitudinal variables, which were the strongest predictors of non-use of IUC, were an adverse opinion on long-acting aspect of IUC (odds ratio [OR]=8.34), disliking the thought of IUC inside the body (OR=3.138), concerns about IUC causing difficulties becoming pregnant in the future (OR=2.587), concerns about womb damage (OR=2.224), having heard adverse opinions about levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (Mirena®) (OR=2.551), having an adverse opinion of having light, irregular periods (OR=2.382) and, having an adverse opinion of having no periods (OR=2.018). CONCLUSION: Concerns about the long-acting nature of IUC and persisting concerns about the safety of IUC may act as barriers to its use. Information for women, tailored to specifically address these concerns, is needed. IMPLICATIONS: Clinicians should provide more reassurance and information to potential users of IUC to increase their confidence about the possibility of removing IUC early or on request. They should also specifically seek to alleviate concerns about internal damage, damage to the womb, or damage to future fertility from using the methods.

Knowledge and reported confidence of final year midwifery students regarding giving advice on contraception and sexual health.

OBJECTIVE: this study explored the views of three cohorts of final year midwifery students, regarding their confidence in giving advice to women on contraception and sexual health in the postnatal period. The project also investigated knowledge of contraception using a factual quiz, based on clinical scenarios regarding contraception and sexual health in the postpartum period. DESIGN: a mixed method design using qualitative data from focus groups, and mixed qualitative and quantitative data from a paper based questionnaire was used. SETTING: the project was carried out in one higher educational institution in England. FINDINGS: findings demonstrate that expressed confidence varies according to contraceptive method, with most confidence being reported when advising on the male condom. The findings of the factual quiz indicate that students applied theoretical knowledge poorly in a practically oriented context. These findings also indicated that most students limited advice to general advice. KEY CONCLUSIONS: the paper concludes that midwifery students need more practically oriented education in contraception and sexual health, and that the role of mentors is very important in helping students feel confident when giving advice in this area.

How can PhD research contribute to the global health research agenda?

We propose that PhD and post-doctoral researchers are a strong, untapped resource with the potential to make a real contribution to global health research (GHR). However, we raise some ethical, institutional and funding issues which either discourage new researchers from entering the field or diminish their capacity to contribute. We offer a number of recommendations to Canadian academic and non-academic institutions and funders, and aim to generate discussion among them about how to overcome these constraints. We need changes in the way graduate research is organized and funded, to create opportunities to work collaboratively within established low- and middle-income country (LMIC)/Canadian research partnerships. We urge changes in the way institutions fund, recognize, value and support GHR, so established researchers are encouraged to develop long-term LMIC relationships and mentor new Canadian/LMIC researchers. We ask funders to reconsider additional GHR activities for support, including strategic training initiatives and dissemination of research results. We also encourage the development of alternative institutions that can provide training and mentoring opportunities. GHR per se faces many challenges. If we address those that reduce our potential to contribute, we can become real partners in GHR, working towards equitable global health and solutions to priority health issues.