Search

Objectives: We determined whether public funding for contraception was associated with long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARC) use when providers received training on these methods., Methods: We evaluated the impact of a clinic training intervention and public funding on LARC use in a cluster randomized trial at 40 randomly assigned clinics across the United States (2011-2013). Twenty intervention clinics received a 4-hour training. Women aged 18 to 25 were enrolled and followed for 1 year (n = 1500: 802 intervention, 698 control). We estimated the effects of the intervention and funding sources on LARC initiation with Cox proportional hazards models with shared frailty., Results: Women at intervention sites had higher LARC initiation than those at control (22 vs 18 per 100 person-years; adjusted hazard ratio [AHR] = 1.43; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.04, 1.98). Participants receiving care at clinics with Medicaid family planning expansion programs had almost twice the initiation rate as those at clinics without (25 vs 13 per 100 person-years; AHR = 2.26; 95% CI = 1.59, 3.19). LARC initiation also increased among participants with public (AHR = 1.56; 95% CI = 1.09, 2.22) but not private health insurance., Conclusions: Public funding and provider training substantially improve LARC access.

Background: Unintended pregnancy remains a serious public health challenge in the USA. We assessed the effects of an intervention to increase patients' access to long-acting reversible contraceptives (LARCs) on pregnancy rates., Methods: We did a cluster randomised trial in 40 reproductive health clinics across the USA in 2011-13. 20 clinics were randomly assigned to receive evidence-based training on providing counselling and insertion of intrauterine devices (IUDs) or progestin implants and 20 to provide standard care. Usual costs for contraception were maintained at all sites. We recruited women aged 18-25 years attending family planning or abortion care visits and not desiring pregnancy in the next 12 months. The primary outcome was selection of an IUD or implant at the clinic visit and secondary outcome was pregnancy within 12 months. We used generalised estimating equations for clustered data to measure the intervention effect on contraceptive selection, and used survival analysis to assess pregnancy rates., Findings: Of 1500 women enrolled, more at intervention than control sites reported receiving counselling on IUDs or implants (565 [71%] of 797 vs 271 [39%] of 693, odds ratio 3·8, 95% CI 2·8-5·2) and more selected LARCs during the clinic visit (224 [28%] vs 117 [17%], 1·9, 1·3-2·8). The pregnancy rate was lower in intervention group than in the control group after family planning visits (7·9 vs 15·4 per 100 person-years), but not after abortion visits (26·5 vs 22·3 per 100 person-years). We found a significant intervention effect on pregnancy rates in women attending family planning visits (hazard ratio 0·54, 95% CI 0·34-0·85)., Interpretation: The pregnancy rate can be reduced by provision of counselling on long-term reversible contraception and access to devices during family planning counselling visits., Funding: William and Flora Hewlett Foundation., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Context: Long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARC) methods (IUDs and implants) are the most effective and cost-effective methods for women. Although they are safe to place immediately following an abortion, most clinics do not offer this service, in part because of the increased cost., Methods: In 2009, telephone interviews were conducted with 20 clinicians and 24 health educators at 25 abortion care practices across the country. A structured topic guide was used to explore general practice characteristics; training, knowledge and attitudes about LARC; and postabortion LARC counseling and provision. Transcripts of the digitally recorded interviews were coded and analyzed using inductive and deductive processes., Results: Respondents were generally positive about the safety and effectiveness of LARC methods; those working in clinics that offered LARC methods immediately postabortion tended to have greater knowledge about LARC than others, and to perceive fewer risks and employ more evidence-based practices. LARC methods often were not included in contraceptive counseling for women at high risk of repeat unintended pregnancy, including young and nulliparous women. Barriers to provision were usually expressed in terms of financial cost--to patients and clinics--and concerns about impact on the smooth flow of clinic procedures. Education and encouragement from professional colleagues regarding LARC, as well as training and adequate reimbursement for devices, were considered critical to changing clinical practice to include immediate postabortion LARC provision., Conclusions: Despite evidence about the safety and cost-effectiveness of postabortion LARC provision, many clinics are not offering it because of financial and logistical concerns, resulting in missed opportunities for preventing repeat unintended pregnancies., (Copyright © 2012 by the Guttmacher Institute.)

Although obstetrician-gynecologists recognize the importance of managing fertility for the reproductive health of individuals, many are not aware of the vital effect they can have on some of the world's most pressing issues. Unintended pregnancy is a key contributor to the rapid population growth that in turn impairs social welfare, hinders economic progress, and exacerbates environmental degradation. An estimated 215 million women in developing countries wish to limit their fertility but do not have access to effective contraception. In the United States, half of all pregnancies are unplanned. Voluntary prevention of unplanned pregnancies is a cost-effective, humane way to limit population growth, slow environmental degradation, and yield other health and welfare benefits. Family planning should be a top priority for our specialty.

Human consumption is depleting the Earth's natural resources and impairing the capacity of life-supporting ecosystems. Humans have changed ecosystems more rapidly and extensively over the past 50 years than during any other period, primarily to meet increasing demands for food, fresh water, timber, fibre and fuel. Such consumption, together with world population increasing from 2.6 billion in 1950 to 6.8 billion in 2009, are major contributors to environmental damage. Strengthening family-planning services is crucial to slowing population growth, now 78 million annually, and limiting population size to 9.2 billion by 2050. Otherwise, birth rates could remain unchanged, and world population would grow to 11 billion. Of particular concern are the 80 million annual pregnancies (38% of all pregnancies) that are unintended. More than 200 million women in developing countries prefer to delay their pregnancy, or stop bearing children altogether, but rely on traditional, less-effective methods of contraception or use no method because they lack access or face other barriers to using contraception. Family-planning programmes have a successful track record of reducing unintended pregnancies, thereby slowing population growth. An estimated $15 billion per year is needed for family-planning programmes in developing countries and donors should provide at least $5 billion of the total, however, current donor assistance is less than a quarter of this funding target.

This commentary makes the case for increased investment in the development of improved contraceptive and multipurpose prevention technologies (MPTs) that better meet the needs and preferences of users, increase the methods' acceptability and use, and ultimately decrease unintended pregnancy. Methods that are inexpensive, user-controlled, and shelf-stable could help address challenges posed by weak supply chains and healthcare systems. New MPTs that protect against pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections (STIs), including HIV, could simultaneously address multiple sexual and reproductive health needs. Although promising scientific leads exist, the high costs and risks associated with contraceptive development has contributed to underinvestment. The public sector, philanthropies, and the pharmaceutical industry have decreased or eliminated investments in contraceptive research and development (R&D) in recent decades. Greater financial and policy support are required for the eventual introduction of new and improved contraceptives and MPTs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]