Colleen P Judge1, Xinhua Zhao2, Florentina E Sileanu2, Maria K Mor2, Sonya Borrero3. 1. University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA. Electronic address: cpj6@pitt.edu. 2. Center for Health Equity, Research, and Promotion, Veterans Affairs Pittsburgh Health Care System, Pittsburgh, PA. 3. Center for Health Equity, Research, and Promotion, Veterans Affairs Pittsburgh Health Care System, Pittsburgh, PA; Center for Research on Health Care, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Women veterans have high rates of medical comorbidities and may be particularly vulnerable to adverse health outcomes associated with unintended pregnancy. OBJECTIVES: The objective of the study was to estimate the prevalence of medical contraindications to estrogen-containing combined hormonal contraception among women veterans of reproductive age and to evaluate the relationship between contraindications and contraceptive use. STUDY DESIGN: This was a secondary analysis of data from a cross-sectional, telephone-based survey with a national sample of 2302 female veterans, aged 18-45 years, who use the Veterans Administration Healthcare System for primary care. This analysis included women at risk of unintended pregnancy, defined as heterosexually active and not pregnant or trying to conceive and with no history of hysterectomy or infertility. Seven contraindications to combined hormonal contraception were identified using survey data or medical diagnosis codes: hypertension; coronary artery disease; active migraine in women older than 35 years or migraine with aura; smoking in women older than 35 years; and a history of thromboembolism, stroke, or breast cancer. Outcomes were current use of combined hormonal contraception and contraceptive method type (combined hormonal contraception, and other prescription methods, nonprescription methods or no method). Multivariable logistic and multinomial regression were used to assess the relationship between contraindications and combined hormonal contraception use and method type, respectively. RESULTS: Among 1169 women veterans at risk of unintended pregnancy, 339 (29%) had at least 1 contraindication to combined hormonal contraception. The most prevalent conditions were hypertension (14.9%) and migraine (8.7%). In adjusted analyses, women with contraindications were less likely than women without contraindications to report use of combined hormonal contraception (adjusted odds ratio, 0.54, 95% confidence interval, 0.37-0.79). Relative to use of combined hormonal contraception, women with contraindications were more likely than women without contraindications to use other prescription methods (adjusted odds ratio, 1.74, 95% confidence interval, 1.17-2.60), nonprescription methods (adjusted odds ratio, 1.96, 95% confidence interval, 1.19-3.22), and no method (adjusted odds ratio, 2.29, 95% confidence interval, 1.35-3.89). CONCLUSION: Women veterans at risk of unintended pregnancy have a high burden of medical contraindications to estrogen. Women with contraindications were less likely to use combined hormonal contraceptive methods but were more likely to use no method, suggesting an unmet need for contraception in this medically vulnerable population.
BACKGROUND:Women veterans have high rates of medical comorbidities and may be particularly vulnerable to adverse health outcomes associated with unintended pregnancy. OBJECTIVES: The objective of the study was to estimate the prevalence of medical contraindications to estrogen-containing combined hormonal contraception among women veterans of reproductive age and to evaluate the relationship between contraindications and contraceptive use. STUDY DESIGN: This was a secondary analysis of data from a cross-sectional, telephone-based survey with a national sample of 2302 female veterans, aged 18-45 years, who use the Veterans Administration Healthcare System for primary care. This analysis included women at risk of unintended pregnancy, defined as heterosexually active and not pregnant or trying to conceive and with no history of hysterectomy or infertility. Seven contraindications to combined hormonal contraception were identified using survey data or medical diagnosis codes: hypertension; coronary artery disease; active migraine in women older than 35 years or migraine with aura; smoking in women older than 35 years; and a history of thromboembolism, stroke, or breast cancer. Outcomes were current use of combined hormonal contraception and contraceptive method type (combined hormonal contraception, and other prescription methods, nonprescription methods or no method). Multivariable logistic and multinomial regression were used to assess the relationship between contraindications and combined hormonal contraception use and method type, respectively. RESULTS: Among 1169 women veterans at risk of unintended pregnancy, 339 (29%) had at least 1 contraindication to combined hormonal contraception. The most prevalent conditions were hypertension (14.9%) and migraine (8.7%). In adjusted analyses, women with contraindications were less likely than women without contraindications to report use of combined hormonal contraception (adjusted odds ratio, 0.54, 95% confidence interval, 0.37-0.79). Relative to use of combined hormonal contraception, women with contraindications were more likely than women without contraindications to use other prescription methods (adjusted odds ratio, 1.74, 95% confidence interval, 1.17-2.60), nonprescription methods (adjusted odds ratio, 1.96, 95% confidence interval, 1.19-3.22), and no method (adjusted odds ratio, 2.29, 95% confidence interval, 1.35-3.89). CONCLUSION:Women veterans at risk of unintended pregnancy have a high burden of medical contraindications to estrogen. Women with contraindications were less likely to use combined hormonal contraceptive methods but were more likely to use no method, suggesting an unmet need for contraception in this medically vulnerable population.
Authors: Amy M Kilbourne; Karen Schumacher; Susan M Frayne; Yasmin Cypel; Michelle M Barbaresso; Kristina M Nord; Juliette Perzhinsky; Zongshan Lai; Katherine Prenovost; Avron Spiro; Theresa C Gleason; Rachel Kimerling; Grant D Huang; Tracey B Serpi; Kathryn M Magruder Journal: J Womens Health (Larchmt) Date: 2017-08-07 Impact factor: 2.681
Authors: Eleanor Bimla Schwarz; Debbie Postlethwaite; Yun-Yi Hung; Eric Lantzman; Mary Anne Armstrong; Michael A Horberg Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2011-09-16 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Natalya C Maisel; Sally Haskell; Patricia M Hayes; Vidhya Balasubramanian; Anupama Torgal; Lakshmi Ananth; Fay Saechao; Samina Iqbal; Ciaran S Phibbs; Susan M Frayne Journal: Med Care Date: 2015-04 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Kathryn M Curtis; Naomi K Tepper; Tara C Jatlaoui; Erin Berry-Bibee; Leah G Horton; Lauren B Zapata; Katharine B Simmons; H Pamela Pagano; Denise J Jamieson; Maura K Whiteman Journal: MMWR Recomm Rep Date: 2016-07-29
Authors: Tierney E Wolgemuth; Maris Cuddeback; Lisa S Callegari; Keri L Rodriguez; Xinhua Zhao; Sonya Borrero Journal: Womens Health Issues Date: 2019-09-23