Advertisement
Original research article| Volume 84, ISSUE 5, P493-498, November 2011

Download started.

Ok

Acceptance of long-acting reversible contraceptive methods by adolescent participants in the Contraceptive CHOICE Project

  • Renee Mestad
    Correspondence
    Corresponding author. Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, New York 13210, USA. Tel.: +1 315 464 4730; fax: +1 315 464 4734.
    Affiliations
    Division of Clinical Research, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St. Louis, MI 63110-1501, USA
    Search for articles by this author
  • Gina Secura
    Affiliations
    Division of Clinical Research, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St. Louis, MI 63110-1501, USA
    Search for articles by this author
  • Jenifer E. Allsworth
    Affiliations
    Division of Clinical Research, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St. Louis, MI 63110-1501, USA
    Search for articles by this author
  • Tessa Madden
    Affiliations
    Division of Clinical Research, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St. Louis, MI 63110-1501, USA
    Search for articles by this author
  • Qiuhong Zhao
    Affiliations
    Division of Clinical Research, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St. Louis, MI 63110-1501, USA
    Search for articles by this author
  • Jeffrey F. Peipert
    Affiliations
    Division of Clinical Research, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St. Louis, MI 63110-1501, USA
    Search for articles by this author

      Abstract

      Background

      Adolescent women have a high risk of unintended pregnancy. Currently, there are little data about their choice to initiate long-acting reversible contraception (LARC).

      Study Design

      We evaluated the association of age and preference for a LARC vs. a non-LARC method among adolescent participants in the Contraceptive CHOICE Project, comparing those aged 14���17 years to adolescents aged 18���20 years. We then analyzed the association between age and choice of the implant vs. the intrauterine device (IUD) among adolescents.

      Results

      Of the 5086 women enrolled, 70% (n=3557) of participants chose a LARC method. Among adolescents aged 14���20 years, 69% of 14���17-year-olds chose LARC, while 61% of 18���20-year-olds chose LARC (relative risk 1.16, 95% confidence interval 1.03���1.30). Among adolescents choosing a LARC method, 63% (n=93/148) of the 14���17-year-olds chose the implant, whereas 71% (n=364/510) of the 18���20-year-olds chose the IUD.

      Conclusion

      Long-acting reversible contraception use is clearly acceptable and common among adolescents enrolled in the Contraceptive CHOICE Project, with the younger group being most interested in the implant.

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Contraception
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

      1. Hatcher R.A. Trussell J. Nelson A.L. Cates W. Stewart F.H. Kowal D. Contraceptive technology. 19th ed. Ardent Media, Inc, New York2007
        • Stanwood N.L.
        • Bradley K.A.
        Young pregnant women's knowledge of modern intrauterine devices.
        Obstet Gynecol. 2006; 108: 1417-1422
        • Grady W.R.
        • Klepinger D.H.
        • Nelson-Wally A.
        Contraceptive characteristics: the perceptions and priorities of men and women.
        Fam Plan Perspect. 1999; 31: 168-175
        • Li C.F.I.
        • Lee S.S.N.
        • Pun T.C.
        A pilot study on the acceptability of levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device by young, single, nulliparous Chinese females following surgical abortion.
        Contraception. 2004; 69: 247-250
        • Toma A.
        • Jamieson M.A.
        Revisiting the intrauterine contraceptive device in adolescents.
        J Pediat Adolesc Gynecol. 2006; 19: 291-296
        • Abma J.C.
        • Martinez G.M.
        • Copen C.E.
        Teenagers in the United States: sexual activity, contraceptive use, and childbearing, National Survey of Family Growth 2006���2008. National Center for Health Statistics.
        Vital Health Stat. 2010; 23 (Accessed on June 11, 2010 at)
      2. ACOG Committee opinion number 392.
        Obstet Gynecol. 2007; 110: 1493-1495
        • Harper C.
        • Blum M.
        • Thiel de Bocanegra H.
        • et al.
        Challenges in translating evidence to practice: the provision of intrauterine contraception.
        Obstet Gynecol. 2008; 111: 1359-1369
        • Secura G.M.
        • Allsworth J.E.
        • Madden T.
        • Mullersman J.L.
        • Peipert J.F.
        The Contraceptive CHOICE Project: reducing barriers to long-acting reversible contraception.
        Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010; 203: 115e1--7
        • Mcnutt L.A.
        • Wu C.
        • Xue X.
        • Hafner J.P.
        Estimating the relative risk in cohort studies and clinical trials of common outcomes.
        Am J Epidemiol. 2003; 157: 940-943
        • Zhang J.
        • Yu K.F.
        What's the relative risk? A method of correcting the odds ratio in cohort studies of common outcomes.
        JAMA. 1998; 280: 1690-1691
        • Whitaker A.
        • Johnson L.
        • Harwood B.
        • Chiappetta L.
        • Crenin M.
        • Gold M.
        Adolescent and young adult women's knowledge of and attitudes toward the intrauterine device.
        Contraception. 2008; 78: 211-217
        • Madden T.
        • Allsworth J.E.
        • Hladky K.J.
        • Secura G.M.
        • Peipert J.F.
        Intrauterine contraception in St. Louis: a survey of obstetrician and gynecologists��� knowledge and attitudes.
        Contraception. 2010; 81: 112-116
        • Mosher W.D.
        • Jones J.
        Use of contraception in the United States: 1982���2008. National Center for Health Statistics.
        Vital Health Stat. 2010; 23 (Accessed on June 11, 2010 at)
        • Henshaw S.K.
        Unintended pregnancy in the United States.
        Fam Plan Perspect. 1998; 30: 24-29
        • Chiou C.F.
        • Trussell J.
        • Reyes E.
        • Knight K.
        • et al.
        Economic analysis of contraceptives for women.
        Contraception. 2003; 68: 3-10
        • Guttmacher Institute
        U.S. teenage pregnancies, births, and abortions: national and state trends and trends by race and ethnicity.
        (Accessed on April 14, 2010 at)