Abstract
Objective
During the COVID-19 pandemic, many clinicians started offering telemedicine services.
The objective of this study is to describe the experience of US family planning providers
with the rapid adoption of telemedicine for contraceptive counseling during this period.
Study design
This is a cross-sectional web-based survey of family planning providers practicing
in the United States.
Results
A total of 172 providers completed the survey (34% response rate). Of these, 156 (91%)
provided telemedicine services in the 2 months preceding the survey. Most (78%) were
new to telemedicine. About half (54%) referred less than a quarter of contraception
patients for in-person visits, and 53% stated that the most common referral reason
was long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARC) insertion. A majority of providers
strongly agree that telemedicine visits are an effective way to provide contraceptive
counseling (80%), and that this service should be expanded after the pandemic (84%).
If asked to provide telemedicine visits after the pandemic, 64% of providers would
be very happy about it. Many providers used personal phones or smartphones to conduct
telemedicine visits but stated that ideal devices would be work-issued computers,
tablets, or phones. More than half (59%) of providers prefer video over phone visits.
Conclusions
Family planning clinicians in the United States reported a positive experience with
telemedicine for contraceptive counseling during the early stage of the COVID-19 pandemic
and believe that this service should be expanded. Clinicians seem to prefer using
work-issued devices and conducting video rather than phone visits.
Implications
Telemedicine is a promising option for providing contraceptive counseling even beyond
the COVID-19 pandemic. An investment in hospital or clinic-issued devices that allow
for video conferencing may optimize clinicians’ telemedicine experience.
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 accessOne-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 ContraceptionAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Randomized comparison of a reduced-visit prenatal care model enhanced with remote monitoring.Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019; 221 (638.e1-638.e8)
- Telehealth interventions to improve obstetric and gynecologic health outcomes: a systematic review.Obstet Gynecol. 2020; 135: 371-382
- Self reported outcomes and adverse events after medical abortion through online telemedicine: population based study in the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland.BMJ. 2017; 357 (j2011)
- Telemedicine for medical abortion: a systematic review.BJOG. 2019; 126: 1094-1102
- Telemedicine for family planning: a scoping review.Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am. 2020; 47: 287-316
- Changes in service delivery patterns after introduction of telemedicine provision of medical abortion in Iowa.Am J Public Health. 2013; 103: 73-78
- Women's and providers' experiences with medical abortion provided through telemedicine: a qualitative study.Womens Health Issues. 2013; 23: e117-e122
- Telemedicine provision of medical abortion in Alaska: through the provider's lens.J Telemed Telecare. 2017; 23: 680-685
- Virtual visits: managing prenatal care with modern technology.MCN Am J Matern Child Nurs. 2016; 41: 24-30
- Patient satisfaction with virtual obstetric care.Matern Child Health J. 2017; 21: 1544-1551
- ACOG Committee Opinion Number 798: Implementing telehealth in practice.Obstet Gynecol. 2020; 135: e73-e79
- Evaluating the impact of Marie Stopes International’s digital family planning counselling application on the uptake of long-acting and permanent methods of contraception in Vietnam and Ethiopia: a study protocol for a multi-country cluster randomised controlled trial.Trials. 2018; 19: 420
- Efficacy of a digital health tool on contraceptive ideation and use in Nigeria: results of a cluster-randomized control trial.Glob Health Sci Pract. 2019; 7: 273-288
- Telephone or integrated contraception counselling before abortion: impact on method choice and receipt.BMJ Sex Reprod Health. 2018; 44: 114-121
- A study of telecontraception.N Engl J Med. 2019; 381: 1287-1288
- Breaking down barriers to birth control access: an assessment of online platforms prescribing birth control in the USA.J Telemed Telecare. 2020; 26: 322-331
- Improving the quality of web surveys: the Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES).J Med Internet Res. 2004; 6: e34
- Telemedicine in diabetes foot care delivery: health care professionals' experience.BMC Health Serv Res. 2016.; 16: 134
- Patient and clinician experiences with telehealth for patient follow-up care.Am J Manag Care. 2019; 25: 40-44
- Presurgical assessment using telemedicine technology: impact on efficiency, effectiveness, and patient experience of care.Telemed J E Health. 2019; 25: 137-142
- Patterns of use and correlates of patient satisfaction with a large nationwide direct to consumer telemedicine service.J Gen Intern Med. 2018; 33: 1768-1773
- Spatial dimensions of telemedicine and abortion access: a qualitative study of women's experiences.Reprod Health. 2019; 16: 94
- Projections and opinions from 100 experts in long-acting reversible contraception.Contraception. 2015; 92: 543-552
Anderson M., Kumar M. Digital divide persists even as lower-income Americans make gains in tech adoption. 2019. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/05/07/digital-divide-persists-even-as-lower-income-americans-make-gains-in-tech-adoption/. (accessed September 1, 2020).
Pew Research Center. Mobile Fact Sheet. 2019. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/fact-sheet/mobile/. (accessed September 1, 2020).
Article info
Publication history
Published online: November 16, 2020
Accepted:
November 10,
2020
Received in revised form:
October 17,
2020
Received:
August 5,
2020
Identification
Copyright
© 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
