Literature DB >> 31805265

Pregnancy preferences and contraceptive use among US women.

Goleen Samari1, Diana G Foster2, Lauren J Ralph2, Corinne H Rocca2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: An understanding of the relationship between individuals' pregnancy preferences and contraceptive use is essential for appropriate patient-centered counseling and care. We examined the relationship between women's pregnancy preferences and contraceptive use using a new prospective measure, the Desire to Avoid Pregnancy (DAP) scale. STUDY
DESIGN: As part of a study examining women's suspicion and confirmation of new pregnancies, we recruited patients aged 15 - 45 from seven reproductive health and primary health facilities in Arizona, New Jersey, New Mexico, South Carolina, and Texas in 2016-2017. We used multivariable logistic, multinomial logistic, and linear regression models to examine the associations among DAP scores (range: 0 - 4) and contraceptive use outcomes and identify factors associated with discordance between DAP and use of contraception.
RESULTS: Participants with a greater preference to avoid pregnancy had higher odds of contraceptive use (aOR = 1.63, 95% CI: 1.31, 2.04) and used contraceptives more consistently (aβ = 8.9 percentage points, 95% CI: 5.2, 12.7). Nevertheless, 63% of women with low preference to avoid pregnancy reported using a contraceptive method. Higher preference to avoid pregnancy was not associated with type of contraceptive method used: women with the full range of pregnancy preferences reported using all method types.
CONCLUSION: When measured using a rigorously developed instrument, pregnancy preferences were associated with contraceptive use and consistency of use. However, our findings challenge assumptions that women with the highest preference against pregnancy use more effective methods and that women who might welcome pregnancy do not use contraception. IMPLICATIONS: Women's preferences about pregnancy contribute significantly to their use of contraception. However, health care providers and researchers should consider that contraceptive features besides effectiveness in preventing pregnancy shape contraceptive decision-making and use.
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Contraceptive use; Inconsistency in contraceptive use; Pregnancy intention; Pregnancy preferences; Pregnancy risk; United States

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31805265      PMCID: PMC7028518          DOI: 10.1016/j.contraception.2019.10.007

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


  32 in total

1.  Contraceptive nonuse among US women at risk for unplanned pregnancy.

Authors:  Justine Wu; Sean Meldrum; Ann Dozier; Nancy Stanwood; Kevin Fiscella
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2008-07-22       Impact factor: 3.375

2.  Contraceptive features preferred by women at high risk of unintended pregnancy.

Authors:  Lauren N Lessard; Deborah Karasek; Sandi Ma; Philip Darney; Julianna Deardorff; Maureen Lahiff; Dan Grossman; Diana Greene Foster
Journal:  Perspect Sex Reprod Health       Date:  2012-07-19

3.  Do racial and ethnic differences in contraceptive attitudes and knowledge explain disparities in method use?

Authors:  Corinne H Rocca; Cynthia C Harper
Journal:  Perspect Sex Reprod Health       Date:  2012-06-26

4.  Young Women's Contraceptive Decision Making: Do Preferences for Contraceptive Attributes Align with Method Choice?

Authors:  Cassondra Marshall; Sylvia Guendelman; Jane Mauldon; Amani Nuru-Jeter
Journal:  Perspect Sex Reprod Health       Date:  2016-08-04

5.  Change and consistency in US women's pregnancy attitudes and associations with contraceptive use.

Authors:  Rachel K Jones
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2017-01-28       Impact factor: 3.375

6.  Factors associated with contraceptive nonuse among US women ages 35-44 years at risk of unwanted pregnancy.

Authors:  Kristen Upson; Susan D Reed; Sarah W Prager; Melissa A Schiff
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2010-01-27       Impact factor: 3.375

7.  Addressing potential pitfalls of reproductive life planning with patient-centered counseling.

Authors:  Lisa S Callegari; Abigail R A Aiken; Christine Dehlendorf; Patty Cason; Sonya Borrero
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2016-10-21       Impact factor: 8.661

8.  One-year contraceptive continuation and pregnancy in adolescent girls and women initiating hormonal contraceptives.

Authors:  Tina R Raine; Anne Foster-Rosales; Ushma D Upadhyay; Cherrie B Boyer; Beth A Brown; Abby Sokoloff; Cynthia C Harper
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 7.661

9.  Beyond intent: exploring the association of contraceptive choice with questions about Pregnancy Attitudes, Timing and How important is pregnancy prevention (PATH) questions.

Authors:  Claudia Geist; Abigail Ra Aiken; Jessica N Sanders; Bethany G Everett; Kyl Myers; Patty Cason; Rebecca G Simmons; David K Turok
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2018-08-17       Impact factor: 3.375

10.  Predictive ability and stability of adolescents' pregnancy intentions in a predominantly Latino community.

Authors:  Corinne H Rocca; Alan E Hubbard; Jennifer Johnson-Hanks; Nancy S Padian; Alexandra M Minnis
Journal:  Stud Fam Plann       Date:  2010-09
View more
  7 in total

1.  mHealth Interventions for Contraceptive Behavior Change in the United States: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Alice F Cartwright; Amy Alspaugh; Laura E Britton; Seth M Noar
Journal:  J Health Commun       Date:  2022-03-08

2.  Associations between unfulfilled contraceptive preferences due to cost and low-income patients' access to and experiences of contraceptive care in the United States, 2015-2019.

Authors:  Megan L Kavanaugh; Emma Pliskin; Rubina Hussain
Journal:  Contracept X       Date:  2022-05-06

3.  Change and stability in contraceptive use patterns among US women over a 12-month period: analysis using the 2013-2015 National Survey of Family Growth life history calendar.

Authors:  Sean M Finn; Ayana Douglas-Hall; Rachel K Jones
Journal:  Contracept X       Date:  2020-06-16

4.  Use of concurrent multiple methods of contraception in the United States, 2008 to 2015.

Authors:  Megan L Kavanaugh; Emma Pliskin; Jenna Jerman
Journal:  Contracept X       Date:  2021-02-08

5.  ["Risk it"-why women who do not intend to get pregnant do not use contraception : Results of the BZgA study "Women's lives 3. Family planning in women's lives"].

Authors:  Cornelia Helfferich; Janet-Lynn Holz; Tilmann Knittel; Laura Olejniczak; Franziska Schmidt
Journal:  Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz       Date:  2021-10-14       Impact factor: 1.513

6.  A Prospective Cohort Study of Changes in Access to Contraceptive Care and Use Two Years after Iowa Medicaid Coverage Restrictions at Abortion-Providing Facilities Went into Effect.

Authors:  Megan L Kavanaugh; Mia Zolna; Emma Pliskin; Katrina MacFarlane
Journal:  Popul Res Policy Rev       Date:  2022-09-03

7.  Use of contraception among reproductive-aged women in the United States, 2014 and 2016.

Authors:  Megan L Kavanaugh; Emma Pliskin
Journal:  F S Rep       Date:  2020-07-09
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.