Savannah Geske1, Randal Quevillon2, Cindy Struckman-Johnson2, Keith Hansen3. 1. Department of Psychology, University of South Dakota, 414 E Clark St, Vermillion, South Dakota. Electronic address: Savannah.peters@coyotes.usd.edu. 2. Department of Psychology, University of South Dakota, 414 E Clark St, Vermillion, South Dakota. 3. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of South Dakota Sanford School of Medicine, Sioux Falls, South Dakota.
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the study was to determine if barriers in rural areas might decrease an adolescent's likelihood of obtaining effective contraception. Previous studies have reported mixed results in comparisons of rural and urban contraception use. DESIGN: Electronic survey. SETTING: Midwestern Public University. PARTICIPANTS: Undergraduate and graduate women. INTERVENTIONS: Questionnaire. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Participants retrospectively recalled their contraceptive use and barriers to contraceptive use between the 9th and 12th grades. RESULTS: A Barriers to Contraception Use Scale was created using exploratory factor analysis and yielded 31 questions with 1 underlying factor: barriers. Participants were identified as rural or urban using the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) definition and the participant's self-identification. Overall, rural participants endorsed more barriers to accessing contraceptives than urban participants using the OMB definition (χ(2) (2; n = 388) = 2.04; P < .05), and self-identification (χ(2) (2; n = 398) = 2.37; P < .05). However, no differences were found in contraception use according to the OMB definition, t (380) = -1.90; P = .06, or self-identification, t (380) = -2.11; P > .05. The Barriers to Contraception Use Scale total score predicted whether an individual would have a prescription for contraceptives 70.5% of the time compared to the base rate of 54.1%. CONCLUSION: Although no rural-urban differences in actual contraception use were found, rural participants reported more barriers to accessing contraception, and those who endorsed more barriers were less likely to obtain contraceptives while in high school. Pregnancy prevention programs should thus take these barriers into account when developing future interventions.
STUDY OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the study was to determine if barriers in rural areas might decrease an adolescent's likelihood of obtaining effective contraception. Previous studies have reported mixed results in comparisons of rural and urban contraception use. DESIGN: Electronic survey. SETTING: Midwestern Public University. PARTICIPANTS: Undergraduate and graduate women. INTERVENTIONS: Questionnaire. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Participants retrospectively recalled their contraceptive use and barriers to contraceptive use between the 9th and 12th grades. RESULTS: A Barriers to Contraception Use Scale was created using exploratory factor analysis and yielded 31 questions with 1 underlying factor: barriers. Participants were identified as rural or urban using the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) definition and the participant's self-identification. Overall, rural participants endorsed more barriers to accessing contraceptives than urban participants using the OMB definition (χ(2) (2; n = 388) = 2.04; P < .05), and self-identification (χ(2) (2; n = 398) = 2.37; P < .05). However, no differences were found in contraception use according to the OMB definition, t (380) = -1.90; P = .06, or self-identification, t (380) = -2.11; P > .05. The Barriers to Contraception Use Scale total score predicted whether an individual would have a prescription for contraceptives 70.5% of the time compared to the base rate of 54.1%. CONCLUSION: Although no rural-urban differences in actual contraception use were found, rural participants reported more barriers to accessing contraception, and those who endorsed more barriers were less likely to obtain contraceptives while in high school. Pregnancy prevention programs should thus take these barriers into account when developing future interventions.
Authors: Erika L Thompson; Helen Mahony; Charlotte Noble; Wei Wang; Robert Ziemba; Markku Malmi; Sarah B Maness; Eric R Walsh-Buhi; Ellen M Daley Journal: J Community Health Date: 2018-04
Authors: Nicole R Tuitt; Nancy L Asdigian; Nancy Rumbaugh Whitesell; Alicia Mousseau; Alia Al-Tayyib; Carol E Kaufman Journal: J Adolesc Date: 2020-02-29