Steiner Markus J, Trussell James, Mehta Neha, Condon Sean, Subramaniam Sumathi, Bourne Deborah
Family Health International, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA.
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006 Jul;195(1):85-91. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2005.12.053. Epub 2006 Apr 19.
The objective of the study was to compare 3 different approaches for increasing clients' understanding of contraceptive effectiveness.
We randomized 900 reproductive-age women in India and Jamaica to 1 of 3 charts presenting pregnancy risk.
The most important reason for choosing a contraceptive was how well it prevents pregnancy (54%) followed by few side effects (17%). At baseline, knowledge about contraceptive effectiveness was poor. About half knew oral contraceptive pills are more effective than condoms (46%) and intrauterine devices are more effective than injectables (50%). All 3 charts improved knowledge significantly (P < .01) for these 2 questions. No chart improved knowledge better than any other (P > .05). The chart ranking contraceptive methods on a continuum was judged slightly easier to understand than the other 2 charts.
Only with accurate understanding of pregnancy risk can clients make informed choices. Our results have already informed a global handbook for family planning providers to use the chart ranking contraceptive methods on a continuum.
本研究的目的是比较三种不同方法，以提高客户对避孕效果的理解。
我们将印度和牙买加的900名育龄妇女随机分为三组，每组使用一种呈现怀孕风险的图表。
选择避孕方法最重要的原因是其预防怀孕的效果（54%），其次是副作用少（17%）。在基线时，对避孕效果的了解较差。约一半的人知道口服避孕药比避孕套更有效（46%），宫内节育器比注射剂更有效（50%）。对于这两个问题，所有三种图表都显著提高了知识水平（P < 0.01）。没有一种图表在提高知识水平方面比其他图表更好（P > 0.05）。将避孕方法按连续统一体排名的图表被认为比其他两种图表稍微更容易理解。
只有准确了解怀孕风险，客户才能做出明智的选择。我们的研究结果已为计划生育提供者的全球手册提供参考，以便使用按连续统一体排名避孕方法的图表。
