Evaluation of satisfaction with a model of structured contraceptive counseling: Results from the LOWE trial

Niklas Envall, Karin Emtell Iwarsson, Isabella Bizjak, Kristina Gemzell Danielsson, Helena Kopp Kallner, Niklas Envall, Karin Emtell Iwarsson, Isabella Bizjak, Kristina Gemzell Danielsson, Helena Kopp Kallner

Abstract

Introduction: Intervention trials of structured contraceptive counseling have proved to increase use of long-acting reversible contraceptives (LARCs) and decrease numbers of unintended pregnancies. However, these interventions have not been evaluated from a user perspective. This study aimed to evaluate both healthcare providers' and participants' satisfaction with an intervention used in a large trial in Sweden.

Material and methods: A cross-sectional study on the intervention group from a cluster randomized trial conducted at 28 clinics in Stockholm, Sweden. Clinics were randomized (1:1 allocation ratio) to provide either structured contraceptive counseling (intervention) or standard contraceptive counseling (control). The intervention consisted of four parts; an educational video to be seen by the participant prior to contraceptive counseling, key questions to be asked by the healthcare provider, an effectiveness chart, and a box of contraceptive models. Eligible participants were 18 years or older, sexually active without a wish to conceive, and with the main purpose of contraceptive use being pregnancy prevention. Healthcare providers completed an electronic semi-structured survey to evaluate the intervention. This study analyses provider and participant satisfaction with the counseling material used in the intervention and if the intervention was found to be supportive in contraceptive counseling and contraceptive choice.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03269357).

Results: Fourteen intervention clinics enrolled 658 participants from September 2017 to May 2019. Response rate among providers was 88.0% (55/62) and among participants 97.1% (639/658). Providers found the intervention to be supportive in their counseling. Each separate part of the intervention package received high ratings from both providers and participants. Participants found the educational video and the effectiveness chart to be more helpful than the box of contraceptive models in their contraceptive choice. Providers reported the time taken to complete the intervention outside the study to be time-neutral to standard counseling, and most providers wished to continue to use all parts of the intervention package.

Conclusions: The intervention of structured contraceptive counseling had high provider and participant satisfaction. The structured counseling package could be used in several clinical settings to improve quality in contraceptive counseling and to enhance informed decision making about use of contraceptive methods.

Keywords: choice; contraception; contraceptive counseling; contraceptive implant; intrauterine device; long-acting reversible contraceptives.

© 2021 The Authors. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Nordic Federation of Societies of Obstetrics and Gynecology (NFOG).

References

REFERENCES

    1. United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs. Population Division (2019). World Contraceptive Use 2019 (POP/DB/CP/Rev2019).
    1. Trussell J. Contraceptive failure in the United States. Contraception. 2011;83:397-404.
    1. United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs. Population Division (2015). Trends in Contraceptive Use Worldwide 2015.
    1. Population Council, International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (FIGO), and Reproductive Health Supplies Coalition. 2013 Statement from the Bellagio Group on LARCs: Long-Acting Reversible Contraception in the Context of Full Access, Full Choice. 18 December 2013. Available at
    1. Curtis KM, Tepper NK, Jatlaoui TC, et al. U.S. Medical eligibility criteria for contraceptive use, 2016. MMWR. Recommend Rep. 2016;65(3):1-103.
    1. Peipert JF, Madden T, Allsworth JE, Secura GM. Preventing unintended pregnancies by providing no-cost contraception. Obstet Gynecol. 2012;120:1291-1297.
    1. Gyllenberg F, Juselius M, Gissler M, Heikinheimo O. Long-acting reversible contraception free of charge, method initiation, and abortion rates in Finland. Am J Public Health. 2018;108:538-543.
    1. Madden T, Mullersman JL, Omvig KJ, Secura GM, Peipert JF. Structured contraceptive counseling provided by the Contraceptive CHOICE Project. Contraception. 2013;88:243-249.
    1. Hellstrom A, Gemzell Danielsson K, Kopp Kallner H. Trends in use and attitudes towards contraception in Sweden: results of a nationwide survey. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2019;24:154-160.
    1. Singh S, Remes L, Sedgh G, Kwok L, Onda T. Abortion Worldwide 2017: Uneven Progress and Unequal Access. Guttmacher Institute; 2018.
    1. Socialstyrelsen. Statistik om aborter 2018 [Statistics on abortions 2018]. In Swedish; 2019.
    1. Kopp Kallner H, Thunell L, Brynhildsen J, Lindeberg M, Gemzell DK. Use of contraception and attitudes towards contraceptive use in Swedish Women-a nationwide survey. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0125990.
    1. Emtell Iwarsson K, Envall N, Bizjak I, Bring J, Kopp Kallner H, Gemzell-Danielsson K. Increasing uptake of long-acting reversible contraception with structured contraceptive counselling: cluster randomised controlled trial (the LOWE trial). BJOG. 2021;128:1546-1554.
    1. Steiner MJ, Trussell J, Johnson S. Communicating contraceptive effectiveness: an updated counseling chart. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007;197:118.
    1. Dehlendorf C, Levy K, Kelley A, Grumbach K, Steinauer J. Women’s preferences for contraceptive counseling and decision making. Contraception. 2013;88(2):250-256.
    1. Merki-Feld GS, Caetano C, Porz TC, Bitzer J. Are there unmet needs in contraceptive counselling and choice? Findings of the European TANCO Study. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2018;23:183-193.
    1. Bitzer J, Gemzell-Danielsson K, Roumen F, Marintcheva-Petrova M, van Bakel B, Oddens BJ. The CHOICE study: effect of counselling on the selection of combined hormonal contraceptive methods in 11 countries. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2012;17:65-78.
    1. Sanders JN, Moran LA, Mullholand M, Torres E, Turok DK. Video counseling about emergency contraception: an observational study. Contraception. 2019;100:54-64.
    1. Dineley B, Patel T, Black M, Koziarski R, Lamarche L, Costescu D. Video media in clinic waiting areas increases interest in most effective contraceptive methods. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2018;40:1302-1308.
    1. Harper CC, Rocca CH, Thompson KM, et al. Reductions in pregnancy rates in the USA with long-acting reversible contraception: a cluster randomised trial. Lancet. 2015;386:562-568.
    1. Steiner MJ, Trussell J, Mehta N, Condon S, Subramaniam S, Bourne D. Communicating contraceptive effectiveness: a randomized controlled trial to inform a World Health Organization family planning handbook. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006;195:85-91.
    1. Lopez LM, Steiner M, Grimes DA, Hilgenberg D, Schulz KF. Strategies for communicating contraceptive effectiveness. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;30(4):CD006964.
    1. Thompson KMJ, Rocca CH, Stern L, et al. Training contraceptive providers to offer intrauterine devices and implants in contraceptive care: a cluster randomized trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018;218:597.e1-e7.
    1. Bharadwaj P, Saxton JC, Mann SN, Jungmann EM, Stephenson JM. What influences young women to choose between the emergency contraceptive pill and an intrauterine device? A qualitative study. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2011;16:201-209.
    1. Finer LB, Zolna MR. Declines in unintended pregnancy in the United States, 2008-2011. N Engl J Med. 2016;374:843-852.
    1. Jerman J, Jones RK, Onda T. Characteristics of US abortion patients in 2014 and changes since 2008. Guttmacher Institute. 2016:1-27.
    1. Stulberg DB, Dahlquist IH, Disterhoft J, Bello JK, Hunter MS. Increase in contraceptive counseling by primary care clinicians after implementation of one key question(R) at an Urban Community Health Center. Matern Child Health J. 2019;23:996-1002.
    1. Dehlendorf C, Reed R, Fitzpatrick J, Kuppermann M, Steinauer J, Kimport K. A mixed-methods study of provider perspectives on My Birth Control: a contraceptive decision support tool designed to facilitate shared decision making. Contraception. 2019;100:420-423.

Source: PubMed

Sponsoren und Mitarbeiter

Krankheiten

Drogeninterventionen

3
Abonnieren