Contraception
Volume 82, Issue 4 , Pages 324-330, October 2010

Obstetrician–gynecologist physicians' beliefs about emergency contraception: a national survey☆

  • Ryan E. Lawrence

      Affiliations

    • Pritzker School of Medicine, The University of Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637, USA
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author.
    • ,
  • Kenneth A. Rasinski

      Affiliations

    • Section of General Internal Medicine, The University of Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637, USA
    • ,
  • John D. Yoon

      Affiliations

    • Section of Hospital Medicine, The University of Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637, USA
    • The MacLean Center for Clinical Medical Ethics, The University of Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637, USA
    • ,
  • Farr A. Curlin

      Affiliations

    • Section of General Internal Medicine, The University of Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637, USA
    • The MacLean Center for Clinical Medical Ethics, The University of Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637, USA

Received 2 April 2010; received in revised form 27 April 2010; accepted 29 April 2010. published online 20 July 2010.

Abstract 

Background

Although emergency contraception (EC) is available without a prescription, women still rely on doctors' advice about its safety and effectiveness. Yet little is known about doctors' beliefs and practices in this area.

Study Design

We surveyed 1800 US obstetrician–gynecologists. Criterion variables were doctors' beliefs about EC's effects on pregnancy rates, and patients' sexual practices. We also asked which women are offered EC. Predictors were demographic, clinical and religious characteristics.

Results

Response rate was 66% (1154/1760). Most (89%) believe EC access lowers unintended pregnancy rates. Some believe women use other contraceptives less (27%), initiate sex at younger ages (12%) and have more sexual partners (15%). Half of physicians offer EC to all women (51%), while others offer it never (6%) or only after sexual assault (6%). Physicians critical of EC, males and religious physicians were more likely to offer it never or only after sexual assault (odds ratios 2.1–12).

Conclusion

Gender, religion and divergent beliefs about EC's effects shape physicians' beliefs and practices.

Keywords: Emergency contraception, Post coital contraception, Levonorgestrel, Ethics, Religion

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

☆ Funding: This study was supported by grants from the Greenwall Foundation, the John Templeton Foundation and the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (1 K23 AT002749, to Farr Curlin). Funding agencies did not participate in study design, data acquisition, analysis, interpretation, writing or submission.

PII: S0010-7824(10)00316-1

doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2010.04.151

Contraception
Volume 82, Issue 4 , Pages 324-330, October 2010

Article Tools