Premium
Reproductive Life Planning and Contraceptive Action Planning for Privately Insured Women: The MyNewOptions Study
Author(s) -
Chuang Cynthia H.,
Weisman Carol S.,
Velott Diana L.,
Lehman Erik,
Chinchilli Ver M.,
Francis Erica B.,
Moos MerryK.,
Sciamanna Christopher N.,
Armitage Christopher J.,
Legro Richard S.
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
perspectives on sexual and reproductive health
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.818
H-Index - 93
eISSN - 1931-2393
pISSN - 1538-6341
DOI - 10.1363/psrh.12123
Subject(s) - medicine , family planning , logistic regression , context (archaeology) , demography , medical prescription , population , condom , psychological intervention , propensity score matching , family medicine , gynecology , environmental health , nursing , research methodology , sociology , paleontology , syphilis , human immunodeficiency virus (hiv) , biology
CONTEXT Although reproductive life planning (RLP) is recommended in federal and clinical guidelines and may help insured women make personalized contraceptive choices, it has not been systematically evaluated for effectiveness. METHODS In 2014, some 984 privately insured women aged 18–40 who were not intending to become pregnant in the next year were randomly assigned to receive RLP, RLP with contraceptive action planning (RLP+) or information only (the control group). Women's contraceptive use, prescription contraceptive use, method adherence, switching to a more effective method, method satisfaction and contraceptive self‐efficacy were assessed at six‐month intervals during the two‐year follow‐up period. Differences between groups were identified using binomial logistic regression, linear regression and generalized estimating equation models. RESULTS During the follow‐up period, the proportion of women using any contraceptive method increased from 89% to 96%, and the proportion using a long‐acting reversible contraceptive or sterilization increased from 8% to 19%. Contraceptive adherence was high (72–76%) in all three groups. In regression models, the sole significant finding was that women in the RLP+ group were more likely than those in the RLP group to use a prescription method (odds ratio, 1.3). No differences were evident between the intervention groups and the control group in overall contraceptive use, contraceptive adherence, switching to a more effective method, method satisfaction or contraceptive self‐efficacy. CONCLUSIONS The study does not provide evidence that web‐based RLP influences contraceptive behaviors in insured women outside of the clinical setting. Further research is needed to identify strategies to help women of reproductive age identify contraceptive methods that meet their needs and preferences.