L K Endres1, M Beshara, S Sondheimer. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, USA. lendres@juno.com
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate women's use, knowledge of and attitudes toward self-administered emergency contraceptive pills (ECP) at the University of Pennsylvania family planning clinic (FPC). STUDY DESIGN: The University of Pennsylvania FPC is a Title X, publicly funded clinic serving urban, low-income women. All women attending the clinic were offered ECP packets. Exclusion criteria for ECP were current pregnancy or newly diagnosed hypertension. Women signed consent forms and were given specific instructions on using ECP with the standard Yuzpe method. Women were contacted for a phone interview after they had the ECP packets at home for six to eight months. RESULTS: One hundred ninety-two women received the ECP packets. Forty-eight were contacted and completed the survey. One hundred forty-four women had moved, no longer had phone service or were unreachable after three or more attempts. Eleven of the 48 women (22.9%) used the ECP, but only 2 of 11 (18.2%) took the pills correctly. One of these two women became pregnant. Of the women who had not used the ECP packets, only 25 of 37 (67.6%) could locate them, and only 9 of 37 (24%) could recall how to use them correctly. Four of 37 (10.8%) experienced an unplanned pregnancy. CONCLUSION: Emergency contraception utilization was far lower than anticipated, suggesting that ready access is not the only issue. Many of the women did not administer ECP correctly or could not state how they would use it in the future despite extensive instruction. Patients will require new and creative approaches to encourage their appropriate use of emergency contraception.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate women's use, knowledge of and attitudes toward self-administered emergency contraceptive pills (ECP) at the University of Pennsylvania family planning clinic (FPC). STUDY DESIGN: The University of Pennsylvania FPC is a Title X, publicly funded clinic serving urban, low-income women. All women attending the clinic were offered ECP packets. Exclusion criteria for ECP were current pregnancy or newly diagnosed hypertension. Women signed consent forms and were given specific instructions on using ECP with the standard Yuzpe method. Women were contacted for a phone interview after they had the ECP packets at home for six to eight months. RESULTS: One hundred ninety-two women received the ECP packets. Forty-eight were contacted and completed the survey. One hundred forty-four women had moved, no longer had phone service or were unreachable after three or more attempts. Eleven of the 48 women (22.9%) used the ECP, but only 2 of 11 (18.2%) took the pills correctly. One of these two women became pregnant. Of the women who had not used the ECP packets, only 25 of 37 (67.6%) could locate them, and only 9 of 37 (24%) could recall how to use them correctly. Four of 37 (10.8%) experienced an unplanned pregnancy. CONCLUSION: Emergency contraception utilization was far lower than anticipated, suggesting that ready access is not the only issue. Many of the women did not administer ECP correctly or could not state how they would use it in the future despite extensive instruction. Patients will require new and creative approaches to encourage their appropriate use of emergency contraception.