Talking straight about emergency contraception

The Complexity of Multiple Contraceptive Method Use and the Anxiety That Informs It: Implications for Theory and Practice

Despite clinical guidelines and national data describing the use of one contraceptive method as the best and most common way to prevent unintended pregnancy, limited evidence indicates a more complex picture of actual contraceptive practice. Face-to-face in-depth interviews were conducted in November of 2013 with a sample of women from two cities in the United States (n = 52). The interviews explored the ways participants used contraception to protect themselves from unintended pregnancy over the past 12 months. Most respondents reported using multiple methods, many of which are considered to be less-effective, within this timeframe. The practice of combining methods in order to increase one's level of protection from pregnancy was prevalent, and was mainly enacted in two ways: by backing up inconsistent method use with other methods and by "buttressing" methods. These practices were found to be more common, and more complex, than previously described in the literature. These behaviors were mainly informed by a deep anxiety about both the efficacy of contraceptive methods, and about respondents' own perceived ability to prevent pregnancy. These findings challenge prevailing assumptions about women's contraceptive method use and have implications for clinical contraceptive counseling practice.

Bridging emergency contraceptive pill users to regular contraception: results from a randomized trial in Jamaica

BACKGROUND

Emergency contraception research has shifted from examining the public health effects of increasing access to emergency contraceptive pills (ECPs) to bridging ECP users to a regular contraceptive method as a way of decreasing unintended pregnancies.

STUDY DESIGN

In a randomized controlled trial in Jamaica, we tested a discount coupon for oral contraceptive pills (OCPs) among pharmacy-based ECP purchasers as an incentive to adopt (i.e., use for at least 2 months) this and other regular contraceptive methods. Women in the intervention and control arms were followed up at 3 and 6 months after ECP purchase to determine whether they adopted the OCP or any other contraceptive method. Condom use was recorded but was not considered a regular contraceptive due to its inconsistent use.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in the proportion of women who adopted the OCP, injectable or intrauterine device in the control group or the intervention group (p=.39), and only 14.6% of the sample (mostly OCP adopters) used one of these three methods. Condom use was high (44.0%), demonstrating that ECP users were largely a condom-using group.

CONCLUSIONS

The discount coupon intervention was not successful. Although a small proportion of ECP users did bridge, the coupon did not affect the decision to adopt a regular contraceptive method. The study highlighted the need for bridging strategies to consider women's reproductive and sexual behaviors, as well as their context. However, in countries like Jamaica where HIV/AIDS is of concern and condom use is appropriately high, bridging may not be an optimal strategy.