Department of Medicine and Public Health Sciences, Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, PA.
Departments of Public Health Sciences and Obstetrics and Gynecology, Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, PA.
Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2019 Dec;51(4):219-227. doi: 10.1363/psrh.12123. Epub 2019 Dec 9.
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.
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.
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.
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.
尽管联邦和临床指南都推荐生殖生活规划(RLP),并且这可能有助于参保女性做出个性化的避孕选择,但它的有效性尚未得到系统评估。
2014 年,大约 984 名年龄在 18-40 岁之间、计划在未来一年内不怀孕的私人参保女性被随机分配接受 RLP、RLP 加避孕行动计划(RLP+)或仅提供信息(对照组)。在两年的随访期间,每六个月评估一次女性的避孕方法使用情况、处方避孕方法使用情况、方法依从性、改用更有效的方法、方法满意度和避孕自我效能。使用二项逻辑回归、线性回归和广义估计方程模型确定组间差异。
在随访期间,使用任何避孕方法的女性比例从 89%增加到 96%,使用长效可逆避孕方法或绝育的女性比例从 8%增加到 19%。所有三组的避孕依从性都很高(72-76%)。在回归模型中,唯一显著的发现是 RLP+组的女性比 RLP 组更有可能使用处方方法(优势比,1.3)。干预组与对照组在总体避孕方法使用、避孕依从性、改用更有效的方法、方法满意度或避孕自我效能方面均无差异。
本研究并未提供证据表明,基于网络的 RLP 会影响临床环境之外参保女性的避孕行为。需要进一步研究以确定帮助育龄女性确定符合其需求和偏好的避孕方法的策略。