Literature DB >> 30266212

Women's preferences for permanent contraception method and willingness to be randomized for a hypothetical trial.

Adriana Piazza1, Kelly Schwirian2, Fiona Scott1, Machelle D Wilson1, Nikki B Zite2, Mitchell D Creinin3.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To understand women's preferences for permanent contraception by salpingectomy or tubal occlusion following standardized counseling and evaluate the practicality of a future randomized trial. STUDY
DESIGN: We invited pregnant and non-pregnant women planning permanent contraception at the University of California, Davis (UCD) and University of Tennessee (UT) Obstetrics and Gynecology clinics to participate. We enrolled women when they received routine counseling and signed procedure consent. Participants received standardized information sheets reviewing permanent contraception options based on pregnancy status then completed an anonymous survey with questions about demographics, method preference, and willingness to participate in a hypothetical randomized trial comparing salpingectomy and tubal occlusion. We evaluated predictors for salpingectomy preference using multivariable analysis.
RESULTS: From July 2015 to October 2016, we enrolled 75 women at UCD and 63 women at UT. Overall, respondents preferred salpingectomy (63.0%); among the 47 women not currently pregnant at both sites, 40 (85.1%) preferred salpingectomy, most commonly because of higher efficacy. Although population characteristics differed significantly between the sites, only UCD site (aOR 4.2; 95% CI 1.9, 9.4) and non-pregnancy status (aOR 4.2; 95% CI 1.6, 10.8) predicted preference for salpingectomy in the multivariable model. Most participants (n=84, 60.9%) would not be willing to be randomized to a theoretical trial comparing salpingectomy and tubal occlusion procedures.
CONCLUSION: Among a diverse group of women from two different areas in the U.S. given a choice of permanent contraception methods, salpingectomy is preferred over tubal occlusion. Most women planning a permanent contraceptive procedure would not agree to a randomized comparison of these methods. IMPLICATIONS STATEMENT: Salpingectomy, which offers theoretically higher efficacy and potentially greater ovarian cancer protection compared to tubal occlusion, is preferred by the majority of patients and should be offered to all women seeking permanent contraception. Differences in method choices less likely reflect the patient population and more likely the counseling provided.
Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Permanent contraception; Randomization; Salpingectomy; Sterilization

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30266212      PMCID: PMC6425927          DOI: 10.1016/j.contraception.2018.09.004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Contraception        ISSN: 0010-7824            Impact factor:   3.375


  16 in total

1.  The Use of Opportunistic Salpingectomy at the Time of Benign Hysterectomy.

Authors:  Sara R Till; Emily K Kobernik; Neil S Kamdar; Madeline G Edwards; Sawsan As-Sanie; Darrell A Campbell; Daniel M Morgan
Journal:  J Minim Invasive Gynecol       Date:  2017-07-13       Impact factor: 4.137

2.  Committee opinion no. 620: Salpingectomy for ovarian cancer prevention.

Authors: 
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 7.661

3.  Effect of tubal sterilization technique on risk of serous epithelial ovarian and primary peritoneal carcinoma.

Authors:  Collette R Lessard-Anderson; Kathryn S Handlogten; Rochelle J Molitor; Sean C Dowdy; William A Cliby; Amy L Weaver; Jennifer St Sauver; Jamie N Bakkum-Gamez
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2014-10-12       Impact factor: 5.482

4.  Opportunistic salpingectomy: uptake, risks, and complications of a regional initiative for ovarian cancer prevention.

Authors:  Jessica N McAlpine; Gillian E Hanley; Michelle M M Woo; Alicia A Tone; Nirit Rozenberg; Kenneth D Swenerton; C Blake Gilks; Sarah J Finlayson; David G Huntsman; Dianne M Miller
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2014-01-09       Impact factor: 8.661

5.  An updated assessment of postpartum sterilization fulfillment after vaginal delivery.

Authors:  Kristen K Wolfe; Machelle D Wilson; Melody Y Hou; Mitchell D Creinin
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2017-05-31       Impact factor: 3.375

Review 6.  Tubal ligation and the risk of ovarian cancer: review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  D Cibula; M Widschwendter; O Májek; L Dusek
Journal:  Hum Reprod Update       Date:  2010-07-15       Impact factor: 15.610

7.  Tubal ligation and risk of ovarian cancer subtypes: a pooled analysis of case-control studies.

Authors:  Weiva Sieh; Shannon Salvador; Valerie McGuire; Rachel Palmieri Weber; Kathryn L Terry; Mary Anne Rossing; Harvey Risch; Anna H Wu; Penelope M Webb; Kirsten Moysich; Jennifer A Doherty; Anna Felberg; Dianne Miller; Susan J Jordan; Marc T Goodman; Galina Lurie; Jenny Chang-Claude; Anja Rudolph; Susanne Krüger Kjær; Allan Jensen; Estrid Høgdall; Elisa V Bandera; Sara H Olson; Melony G King; Lorna Rodriguez-Rodriguez; Lambertus A Kiemeney; Tamara Marees; Leon F Massuger; Anne M van Altena; Roberta B Ness; Daniel W Cramer; Malcolm C Pike; Celeste Leigh Pearce; Andrew Berchuck; Joellen M Schildkraut; Alice S Whittemore
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 7.196

8.  Successful completion of total and partial salpingectomy at the time of cesarean delivery.

Authors:  Kristiana Lehn; Linda Gu; Mitchell D Creinin; Melissa J Chen
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2018-06-20       Impact factor: 3.375

9.  Safety outcomes of female sterilization by salpingectomy and tubal occlusion.

Authors:  Julie Westberg; Fiona Scott; Mitchell D Creinin
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2017-02-21       Impact factor: 3.375

10.  Contraceptive method use in the United States: trends and characteristics between 2008, 2012 and 2014.

Authors:  Megan L Kavanaugh; Jenna Jerman
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2017-10-13       Impact factor: 3.375

View more
  1 in total

1.  Patients' perceptions toward and the driving factors of decision-making for opportunistic bilateral salpingectomy at the time of cesarean section.

Authors:  Murat Yassa; Çiğdem Pulatoğlu
Journal:  Turk J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2020-07-29
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.