Observational, prospective, multicentre study to evaluate the effects of counselling on the choice of combined hormonal contraceptives in Italy--the ECOS (Educational COunselling effectS) study

Alessandro Gambera, Fedela Corda, Rosetta Papa, Carlo Bastianelli, Sandra Bucciantini, Salvatore Dessole, Pasquale Scagliola, Nadia Bernardini, Daniela de Feo, Fabiola Beligotti, Alessandro Gambera, Fedela Corda, Rosetta Papa, Carlo Bastianelli, Sandra Bucciantini, Salvatore Dessole, Pasquale Scagliola, Nadia Bernardini, Daniela de Feo, Fabiola Beligotti

Abstract

Background: Adequate counselling on contraceptive methods can help users choose the most appropriate method. The aim of this study was to assess the effects of structured counselling provided by gynaecologists on selection of a combined hormonal contraception method.

Methods: Women aged 18-40 years (n = 1871) who were considering the use of a combined hormonal contraception method (pill, transdermal patch or vaginal ring) underwent a structured counselling session in which gynaecologists provided comprehensive information. Pre- and post-counselling questionnaires on combined hormonal contraception choice were completed by participants.

Results: After counselling, many women (38 %) selected a combined hormonal contraception method that was different from the originally intended one. Preferences for the transdermal patch approximately doubled (from 3.2 % pre-counselling to 7 %; p < 0.0001) and those for the vaginal ring increased four-fold (from 5.2 to 21.2 %; p < 0.0001), while preference for the pill remained unchanged (from 64.5 % [pre-] to 64.1 % [post-counselling]). The proportion of undecided women decreased from 18 to 2.1 % (p < 0.0001). The main reasons for choosing a method were related to ease of use (all methods), and preferences for administration frequency (daily, weekly or monthly). The number of patients requiring post-counselling contact with the physician's office was low (5.1-6.9 %), as was the incidence of adverse events (1.8-3.1 %).

Conclusions: Counselling has a significant impact on women's choice of combined hormonal contraception and encourages them to consider alternative methods to combined oral contraceptives. Moreover, it also enables women to use their chosen method with confidence.

Trial registration: NCT01181778 , Trial registration date: August 12, 2010.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Main reasons for choosing the pill (a) and reasons for NOT choosing the pill versus method chosen (b) (percent of women stating each reason)
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Main reasons for choosing the patch (a) and reasons for NOT choosing the patch versus method chosen (b) (percent of women stating each reason)
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Main reasons for choosing the ring (a) and reasons for NOT choosing the ring versus method chosen (b) (percent of women stating each reason)

References

    1. WHO The reproductive health report: The state of sexual and reproductive health within the European Union. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2011;16(Suppl 1):S1–S70.
    1. United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division. World Contraceptive Use 2011: .
    1. Hooper DJ. Attitudes, awareness, compliance and preferences among hormonal contraception users: a global, cross-sectional, self-administered, online survey. Clin Drug Investig. 2010;30:749–763. doi: 10.2165/11538900-000000000-00000.
    1. Johnson S, Pion C, Jennings V. Current methods and attitudes of women towards contraception in Europe and America. Reprod Health. 2013;10:7. doi: 10.1186/1742-4755-10-7.
    1. Mosher WD, Jones J. Use of contraception in the United States: 1982–2008. National Center for Health Statistics. Vital Health Stat. 2010;23(29):1–44.
    1. Skouby SO. Contraceptive use and behavior in the 21st century: a comprehensive study across five European countries. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2004;9:57–68. doi: 10.1080/13625180410001715681.
    1. Lopez LM, Grimes DA, Gallo MF, Stockton LL, Schulz KF. Skin patch and vaginal ring versus combined oral contraceptives for contraception. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;4:CD003552.
    1. Mansour D, Inki P, Gemzell-Danielsson K. Efficacy of contraceptive methods: A review of the literature. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2010;15:4–16. doi: 10.3109/13625180903427675.
    1. Goa KL, Warner GT, Easthope SE. Transdermal ethinylestradiol/norelgestromin: a review of its use in hormonal contraception. Treat Endocrinol. 2003;2:191–206. doi: 10.2165/00024677-200302030-00005.
    1. Roumen FJ, Mishell DR., Jr The contraceptive vaginal ring, NuvaRing®, a decade after its introduction. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2012;17:415–427. doi: 10.3109/13625187.2012.713535.
    1. Egarter C, Frey Tirri B, Bitzer J, Kaminskyy V, Oddens BJ, Prilepskaya V, Yeshaya A, Marintcheva-Petrova M, Weyers S. Women’s perceptions and reasons for choosing the pill, patch, or ring in the CHOICE study: a cross-sectional survey of contraceptive method selection after counseling. BMC Womens Health. 2013;13:9. doi: 10.1186/1472-6874-13-9.
    1. Lete I, Doval JL, Pérez-Campos E, Sánchez-Borrego R, Correa M, de la Viuda E, Gómez MA, González JV, Lertxundi R, Martínez MT, Mendoza N, Robledo J. Factors affecting women’s selection of a combined hormonal contraceptive method: the TEAM-06 Spanish cross-sectional study. Contraception. 2007;76:77–83. doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2007.04.014.
    1. de Irala J, Osorio A, Carlos S, Lopez-del BC. Choice of birth control methods among European women and the role of partners and providers. Contraception. 2011;84:558–564. doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2011.04.004.
    1. Merckx M, Donders GG, Grandjean P, Van de Sande T, Weyers S. Does structured counselling influence combined hormonal contraceptive choice? Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2011;16:418–429. doi: 10.3109/13625187.2011.625882.
    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. doi: 10.3109/13625187.2011.637586.
    1. Machado RB, Pompei LM, Giribela A, de Melo NR. Impact of standardized information provided by gynecologists on women’s choice of combined hormonal contraception. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2013;29:855–858. doi: 10.3109/09513590.2013.808325.
    1. Nappi RE, Italian Nuvaring Study Group Counseling on vaginal delivery of contraceptive hormones: implications for women’s body knowledge and sexual health. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2013;29:1015–1021. doi: 10.3109/09513590.2013.830100.
    1. Victor I, Fink RA. Comparing patient telephone callback rates for different hormonal birth control delivery systems. Am J Ther. 2006;13:507–512. doi: 10.1097/01.mjt.0000212893.28081.b8.
    1. Gemzell-Danielsson K, Cho S, Inki P, Mansour D, Reid R, Bahamondes L. Use of contraceptive methods and contraceptive recommendations among health care providers actively involved in contraceptive counseling -- results of an international survey in 10 countries. Contraception. 2012;86:631–638. doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2012.06.002.

Source: PubMed

스폰서 및 공동 작업자

건강 상태

약물 개입

3
구독하다