Preventing subsequent births for low-income adolescent mothers: an exploratory investigation of mediating factors in intensive case management

Rapid repeat pregnancy in women with schizophrenia

AIM

Women with schizophrenia are vulnerable to adverse reproductive health outcomes. Short inter-pregnancy interval, or rapid repeat pregnancy, is associated with maternal and infant complications, and may be preventable. Whether women with schizophrenia are at disproportionate risk for rapid repeat pregnancy is unknown.

METHODS

This population-based cohort study in Ontario, Canada (2002-2013) compared women with and without schizophrenia on their risk of rapid repeat pregnancy, defined as pregnancy within 12 months of an index live birth. Among women with public drug coverage, those with and without schizophrenia were compared on their use of non-barrier contraception (hormonal and surgical) post-delivery.

RESULTS

Women with schizophrenia (n = 1565) were at higher risk for rapid repeat pregnancy than women without schizophrenia (n = 924,657) (6.3% vs. 3.9%, adjusted relative risk, aRR 1.31, 95% confidence interval, CI, 1.07-1.59). They had more rapid repeat pregnancies resulting in live births (aRR 1.85, 95% CI 1.26-2.72), but not pregnancy losses (aRR 1.50, 95% CI 0.99-2.29) or induced abortions (aRR 1.07, 95% CI 0.81-1.42). Post-delivery non-barrier contraception use was similar between groups (43.7% vs. 43.6%, aRR 1.06, 95% CI 0.93-1.20), although women with schizophrenia were more likely to use injectable contraception (14.1% vs. 10.1%, aRR 1.67, 95% CI 1.35-2.07).

DISCUSSION

Women with schizophrenia are at higher risk than their peers for rapid repeat pregnancy, but use non-barrier contraception at similar rates. The postnatal period is an opportune time to initiate targeted interventions designed to optimize planning for any future pregnancies, and contribute to improving maternal and child health in this vulnerable group.

Clinic-Based Programs to Prevent Repeat Teen Pregnancy: A Systematic Review

CONTEXT

The purpose of this paper is to synthesize and evaluate the evidence on the effectiveness of repeat teen pregnancy prevention programs offered in clinical settings.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Multiple databases were searched for peer-reviewed articles published from January 1985 to April 2016 that included key terms related to adolescent reproductive health services. Analysis of these studies occurred in 2017. Studies were excluded if they focused solely on sexually transmitted disease/HIV prevention services, or occurred outside of a clinic setting or the U.S., Canada, Europe, Australia, or New Zealand. Inclusion and exclusion criteria further narrowed the studies to those that included information on at least one short-term (e.g., increased knowledge); medium-term (e.g., increased contraceptive use); or long-term (e.g., decreased repeat teen pregnancy) outcome, or identified contextual barriers or facilitators for providing adolescent-focused family planning services. Standardized abstraction methods and tools were used to synthesize the evidence and assess its quality. Only studies of clinic-based programs focused on repeat teen pregnancy prevention were included in this review.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

The search strategy identified 27,104 citations, 940 underwent full-text review, and 120 met the adolescent-focused family planning services inclusion criteria. Only five papers described clinic-based programs focused on repeat teen pregnancy prevention. Four studies found positive (n=2) or null (n=2) effects on repeat teen pregnancy prevention; an additional study described facilitators for helping teen mothers remain linked to services.

CONCLUSIONS

This review identified clinic-based repeat teen pregnancy prevention programs and few positively affect factors that may reduce repeat teen pregnancy. Access to immediate postpartum contraception or home visiting programs may be opportunities to meet adolescents where they are and reduce repeat teen pregnancy.

THEME INFORMATION

This article is part of a theme issue entitled Updating the Systematic Reviews Used to Develop the U.S. Recommendations for Providing Quality Family Planning Services, which is sponsored by the Office of Population Affairs, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Interventions for Preventing Unintended, Rapid Repeat Pregnancy Among Adolescents: A Review of the Evidence and Lessons From High-Quality Evaluations

BACKGROUND

In 2017, of the 22.5 million parenting adolescents (ages 15-19) in 60 countries, approximately 4.1 million gave birth to a second or higher-order child. Adolescent pregnancy in general, and rapid repeat pregnancies specifically, expose young mothers and their children to multiple health and socioeconomic risks. The purpose of this article is to review the impact of interventions designed to prevent unintended, rapid repeat pregnancies among adolescents, including those aimed at changing norms to postpone "intended" closely spaced pregnancies to promote healthy spacing.

METHODS

We searched PubMed and other databases for evaluations of interventions published in English from 1990 through 2016. We included evaluations that assessed a programmatic intervention specifically designed to prevent rapid repeat pregnancy (occurring less than 24 months after the index birth) or birth (occurring less than 33 months after the index birth), or that reported on contraceptive continuation for at least 2 years. We first assessed the quality of the evaluations, then ranked the interventions based on the quality of the evaluation and the level of impact on repeat pregnancy or birth (statistically significant impact, positive trends but not statistically significant, or no impact) to identify the most effective interventions. Finally, we extracted program design and implementation lessons from the interventions included in the high-quality evaluations.

RESULTS

Our search identified 2,187 articles, of which 40 evaluations met the inclusion criteria (24=high quality, 14=moderate quality, 2=less rigorous). We found 14 high-quality evaluations in which the intervention achieved a statistically significant impact on repeat pregnancy or birth. These interventions fell into 5 broad categories: (1) contraceptive services and information, with proactive monitoring of contraceptive use and outreach to families; (2) postpartum contraceptive counseling and services provided soon after delivery; (3) activities that help adolescents improve planning skills, including preparing contraceptive plans; (4) social and behavioral change activities that help adolescents understand the role contraception can play in determining positive life outcomes, and the implications of their reproductive health decisions for their future; and (5) activities that provide mentoring, goal setting, and motivation.

CONCLUSION

Effective interventions that prevent rapid adolescent childbearing link clinical contraceptive services with non-clinical activities that build planning skills, enhance understanding of the role that contraceptives can play in determining positive life outcomes, and provide mentoring and goal setting. Recognizing potentially synergistic effects, we recommend testing various combinations of these interventions, with access to contraception as the foundational activity.

Factors influencing repeated teenage pregnancy: a review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Existing evidence of predictors of repeated teenage pregnancy has not been assessed rigorously. This systematic review provides a comprehensive evaluation of protective and risk factors that are associated with repeated teenage pregnancy through a metaanalytical consensus.

DATA SOURCES

We used PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, ProQuest, PsychINFO, ScienceDirect, Scopus, and Web of Science databases from 1997-2015 and the reference list of other relevant research papers and related reviews.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Eligibility criteria included (1) epidemiologic studies that analyzed factors associated with repeated pregnancy or birth among adolescents <20 years of age who were nulliparous or experienced at least 1 pregnancy, and (2) experimental studies with an observational component that was adjusted for the intervention.

STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS

We performed narrative synthesis of study characteristics, participant characteristics, study results, and quality assessment. We also conducted random-effects and quality-effects metaanalyses with meta-regression to obtain pooled odds ratios of identified factors and to determine sources of between-study heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Twenty-six eligible epidemiologic studies, most from the United States (n=24), showed >47 factors with no evidence of publication bias for each metaanalysis. Use of contraception (pooled odds ratio, 0.60; 95% confidence interval, 0.35-1.02), particularly long-acting reversible contraceptives (pooled odds ratio, 0.19; 95% confidence interval, 0.08-0.45), considerably reduced repeated teenage pregnancy risk. Among studies about contraception, the number of follow-up visits (adjusted coefficient, 0.72; P=.102) and country of study (unadjusted coefficient, 2.57; permuted P=.071) explained between-study heterogeneity. Education-related factors, which included higher level of education (pooled odds ratio, 0.74; 95% confidence interval, 0.60-0.91) and school continuation (pooled odds ratio, 0.53; 95% confidence interval, 0.33-0.84), were found to be protective. Conversely, depression (pooled odds ratio, 1.46; 95% confidence interval, 1.14-1.87), history of abortion (pooled odds ratio, 1.66; 95% confidence interval, 1.08-2.54), and relationship factors, such as partner support, increased the repeated teenage pregnancy risk.

CONCLUSION

Contraceptive use, educational factors, depression, and a history of abortion are the highly influential predictors of repeated teenage pregnancy. However, there is a lack of epidemiologic studies in low- and middle-income countries to measure the extent and characteristics of repeated teenage pregnancy across more varied settings.

Intervention Now to Eliminate Repeat Unintended Pregnancy in Teenagers (INTERUPT): a systematic review of intervention effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, and qualitative and realist synthesis of implementation factors and user engagement

BACKGROUND

Unintended repeat conceptions can result in emotional, psychological and educational harm to young women, often with enduring implications for their life chances. This study aimed to identify which young women are at the greatest risk of repeat unintended pregnancies; which interventions are effective and cost-effective; and what are the barriers to and facilitators for the uptake of these interventions.

METHODS

We conducted a mixed-methods systematic review which included meta-analysis, framework synthesis and application of realist principles, with stakeholder input and service user feedback to address this. We searched 20 electronic databases, including MEDLINE, Excerpta Medica database, Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts and Research Papers in Economics, to cover a broad range of health, social science, health economics and grey literature sources. Searches were conducted between May 2013 and June 2014 and updated in August 2015.

RESULTS

Twelve randomised controlled trials (RCTs), two quasi-RCTs, 10 qualitative studies and 53 other quantitative studies were identified. The RCTs evaluated psychosocial interventions and an emergency contraception programme. The primary outcome was repeat conception rate: the event rate was 132 of 308 (43%) in the intervention group versus 140 of 289 (48%) for the control group, with a non-significant risk ratio (RR) of 0.92 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78-1.08]. Four studies reported subsequent birth rates: 29 of 237 (12%) events for the intervention arm versus 46 out of 224 (21%) for the control arm, with an RR of 0.60 (95% CI 0.39-0.93). Many repeat conceptions occurred in the context of poverty, low expectations and aspirations and negligible opportunities. Qualitative and realist evidence highlighted the importance of context, motivation, future planning and giving young women a central and active role in the development of new interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

Little or no evidence for the effectiveness or cost-effectiveness of any of the interventions to reduce repeat pregnancy in young women was found. Qualitative and realist evidence helped to explain gaps in intervention design that should be addressed. More theory-based, rigorously evaluated programmes need to be developed to reduce unintended repeat pregnancy in young women.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO, CRD42012003168 . Cochrane registration number: i = fertility/0068.

Intervention Now to Eliminate Repeat Unintended Pregnancy in Teenagers (INTERUPT): a systematic review of intervention effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, and qualitative and realist synthesis of implementation factors and user engagement

BACKGROUND

The UK has one of the highest rates of teenage pregnancies in Western Europe. One-fifth of these are repeat pregnancies. Unintended conceptions can cause substantial emotional, psychological and educational harm to teenagers, often with enduring implications for life chances. Babies of teenage mothers have increased mortality and are at a significantly increased risk of poverty, educational underachievement and unemployment later in life, with associated costs to society. It is important to identify effective, cost-effective and acceptable interventions.

OBJECTIVES

To identify who is at the greatest risk of repeat unintended pregnancies; which interventions are effective and cost-effective; and what the barriers to and facilitators of the uptake of these interventions are.

DATA SOURCES

We conducted a multistreamed, mixed-methods systematic review informed by service user and provider consultation to examine worldwide peer-reviewed evidence and UK-generated grey literature to find and evaluate interventions to reduce repeat unintended teenage pregnancies. We searched the following electronic databases: MEDLINE and MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, PsycINFO, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, The Cochrane Library (Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects and the Health Technology Assessment Database), EMBASE (Excerpta Medica database), British Nursing Index, Educational Resources Information Center, Sociological Abstracts, Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts, BiblioMap (the Evidence for Policy and Practice Information and Co-ordinating Centre register of health promotion and public health research), Social Sciences Citation Index (supported by Web of Knowledge), Research Papers in Economics, EconLit (American Economic Association's electronic bibliography), OpenGrey, Scopus, Scirus, Social Care Online, National Research Register, National Institute for Health Research Clinical Research Network Portfolio and Index to THESES. Searches were conducted in May 2013 and updated in June 2014. In addition, we conducted a systematic search of Google (Google Inc., Mountain View, CA, USA) in January 2014. Database searches were guided by an advisory group of stakeholders.

REVIEW METHODS

To address the topic's complexities, we used a structured, innovative and iterative approach combining methods tailored to each evidence stream. Quantitative data (effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, risk factors and effect modifiers) were synthesised with reference to Cochrane guidelines for evaluating evidence on public health interventions. Qualitative evidence addressing facilitators of and barriers to the uptake of interventions, experience and acceptability of interventions was synthesised thematically. We applied the principles of realist synthesis to uncover theories and mechanisms underpinning interventions (what works, for whom and in what context). Finally, we conducted an overarching narrative of synthesis of evidence and gathered service user feedback.

RESULTS

We identified 8664 documents initially, and 816 in repeat searches. We filtered these to 12 randomised controlled trials (RCTs), four quasi-RCTs, 10 qualitative studies and 53 other quantitative studies published between 1996 and 2012. None of the RCTs was based in the UK. The RCTs evaluated an emergency contraception programme and psychosocial interventions. We found no evidence for effectiveness with regard to condom use, contraceptive use or rates of unprotected sex or use of birth control. Our primary outcome was repeat conception rate: the event rate was 132 of 308 (43%) in the intervention group versus 140 of 289 (48%) for the control goup, with a non-significant risk ratio (RR) of 0.92 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78 to 1.08]. Four studies reported subsequent birth rates: 29 of 237 (12%) events for the intervention arm versus 46 out of 224 (21%) for the control arm, with a RR of 0.60 (95% CI 0.39 to 0.93). Many repeat conceptions occurred in the context of poverty, low expectations and aspirations, and negligible opportunities. Service user feedback suggested that there were specific motivations for many repeat conceptions, for example to replace loss or to please a partner. Realist synthesis highlighted that context, motivation, planning for the future and letting young women take control with connectedness and tailoring provide a conceptual framework for future research.

LIMITATIONS

Included studies rarely characterised adolescent pregnancy as intended or unintended, that is interventions to reduce repeat conceptions rarely addressed whether or not pregnancies were intended. Furthermore, interventions were often not clearly defined, had multiple aims and did not indicate which elements were intended to address which aims. Nearly all of the studies were conducted in the USA and focused largely on African American or Hispanic and Latina American populations.

CONCLUSIONS

We found no evidence to indicate that existing interventions to reduce repeat teenage pregnancy were effective; however, subsequent births were reduced by home-based interventions. Qualitative and realist evidence helped to explain gaps in intervention design that should be addressed. More theory-based, rigorously evaluated programmes need to be developed to reduce repeat teenage pregnancy in the UK.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42012003168. Cochrane registration number: i=fertility/0068.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.