Joseph E Potter1, Kate Coleman-Minahan, Kari White, Daniel A Powers, Chloe Dillaway, Amanda J Stevenson, Kristine Hopkins, Daniel Grossman. 1. Population Research Center, University of Texas, Austin, Texas; the College of Nursing, University of Colorado-Denver, Denver, Colorado; Health Care Organization and Policy, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama; the Institute of Behavioral Science, University of Colorado-Boulder, Boulder, Colorado; and ANSIRH, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess women's preferences for contraception after delivery and to compare use with preferences. METHODS: In a prospective cohort study of women aged 18-44 years who wanted to delay childbearing for at least 2 years, we interviewed 1,700 participants from eight hospitals in Texas immediately postpartum and at 3 and 6 months after delivery. At 3 months, we assessed contraceptive preferences by asking what method women would like to be using at 6 months. We modeled preference for highly effective contraception and use given preference according to childbearing intentions using mixed-effects logistic regression testing for variability across hospitals and differences between those with and without immediate postpartum long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) provision. RESULTS: Approximately 80% completed both the 3- and 6-month interviews (1,367/1,700). Overall, preferences exceeded use for both-LARC: 40.8% (n=547) compared with 21.9% (n=293) and sterilization: 36.1% (n=484) compared with 17.5% (n=235). In the mixed-effects logistic regression models, several demographic variables were associated with a preference for LARC among women who wanted more children, but there was no significant variability across hospitals. For women who wanted more children and had a LARC preference, use of LARC was higher in the hospital that offered immediate postpartum provision (P<.035) as it was for U.S.-born women (odds ratio [OR] 2.08, 95% CI 1.17-3.69) and women with public prenatal care providers (OR 2.04, 95% CI 1.13-3.69). In the models for those who wanted no more children, there was no significant variability in preferences for long-acting or permanent methods across hospitals. However, use given preference varied across hospitals (P<.001) and was lower for black women (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.12-0.55) and higher for U.S.-born women (OR 2.32, 95% CI 1.36-3.96), those 30 years of age and older (OR 1.82, 95% CI 1.07-3.09), and those with public prenatal care providers (OR 2.04, 95% CI 1.18-3.51). CONCLUSION: Limited use of long-acting and permanent contraceptive methods after delivery is associated with indicators of health care provider and system-level barriers. Expansion of immediate postpartum LARC provision as well as contraceptive coverage for undocumented women could reduce the gap between preference and use.
OBJECTIVE: To assess women's preferences for contraception after delivery and to compare use with preferences. METHODS: In a prospective cohort study of women aged 18-44 years who wanted to delay childbearing for at least 2 years, we interviewed 1,700 participants from eight hospitals in Texas immediately postpartum and at 3 and 6 months after delivery. At 3 months, we assessed contraceptive preferences by asking what method women would like to be using at 6 months. We modeled preference for highly effective contraception and use given preference according to childbearing intentions using mixed-effects logistic regression testing for variability across hospitals and differences between those with and without immediate postpartum long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) provision. RESULTS: Approximately 80% completed both the 3- and 6-month interviews (1,367/1,700). Overall, preferences exceeded use for both-LARC: 40.8% (n=547) compared with 21.9% (n=293) and sterilization: 36.1% (n=484) compared with 17.5% (n=235). In the mixed-effects logistic regression models, several demographic variables were associated with a preference for LARC among women who wanted more children, but there was no significant variability across hospitals. For women who wanted more children and had a LARC preference, use of LARC was higher in the hospital that offered immediate postpartum provision (P<.035) as it was for U.S.-born women (odds ratio [OR] 2.08, 95% CI 1.17-3.69) and women with public prenatal care providers (OR 2.04, 95% CI 1.13-3.69). In the models for those who wanted no more children, there was no significant variability in preferences for long-acting or permanent methods across hospitals. However, use given preference varied across hospitals (P<.001) and was lower for black women (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.12-0.55) and higher for U.S.-born women (OR 2.32, 95% CI 1.36-3.96), those 30 years of age and older (OR 1.82, 95% CI 1.07-3.09), and those with public prenatal care providers (OR 2.04, 95% CI 1.18-3.51). CONCLUSION: Limited use of long-acting and permanent contraceptive methods after delivery is associated with indicators of health care provider and system-level barriers. Expansion of immediate postpartum LARC provision as well as contraceptive coverage for undocumented women could reduce the gap between preference and use.
Authors: Alicia T Luchowski; Britta L Anderson; Michael L Power; Greta B Raglan; Eve Espey; Jay Schulkin Journal: Contraception Date: 2014-02-18 Impact factor: 3.375
Authors: Sonya Borrero; Cara Nikolajski; Keri L Rodriguez; Mitchell D Creinin; Robert M Arnold; Said A Ibrahim Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2008-12-19 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Abigail R A Aiken; Mitchell D Creinin; Andrew M Kaunitz; Anita L Nelson; James Trussell Journal: Contraception Date: 2014-08-07 Impact factor: 3.375
Authors: Kate Coleman-Minahan; Chloe H Dillaway; Caitlin Canfield; Daniela M Kuhn; Katherine S Strandberg; Joseph E Potter Journal: Perspect Sex Reprod Health Date: 2018-12-03
Authors: Kavita Shah Arora; Xinhua Zhao; Colleen Judge-Golden; Maria K Mor; Lisa S Callegari; Sonya Borrero Journal: J Womens Health (Larchmt) Date: 2020-02-04 Impact factor: 2.681
Authors: Joseph E Potter; Amanda Jean Stevenson; Kate Coleman-Minahan; Kristine Hopkins; Kari White; Sarah E Baum; Daniel Grossman Journal: Contraception Date: 2019-03-07 Impact factor: 3.375
Authors: Tania Maria Caballero; Laura Bou Delgado; Linxuan Wu; Krishna Upadhya; Sara B Johnson; Lisa R DeCamp Journal: Matern Child Health J Date: 2021-11-29
Authors: Michelle A Eilers; C Emily Hendrick; Rafael Pérez-Escamilla; Daniel A Powers; Joseph E Potter Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2020-03-18 Impact factor: 7.124