Development of a clinical questionnaire to support contraception decisions in an adolescent reproductive health clinic in Colorado.

IF 3.4 2区 医学 Q1 DEMOGRAPHY Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health Pub Date : 2023-09-01 Epub Date: 2023-08-09 DOI:10.1363/psrh.12242
Andrea J Hoopes, Aletha Y Akers, Andrea Jimenez-Zambrano, Sarah Cain, Julie Maslowsky, Jeanelle Sheeder
{"title":"Development of a clinical questionnaire to support contraception decisions in an adolescent reproductive health clinic in Colorado.","authors":"Andrea J Hoopes, Aletha Y Akers, Andrea Jimenez-Zambrano, Sarah Cain, Julie Maslowsky, Jeanelle Sheeder","doi":"10.1363/psrh.12242","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Context: </strong>Adolescents need support to make informed decisions about contraception. Few clinical questionnaires exist to help adolescents and their healthcare providers align contraception decisions with patient needs and preferences.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Our mixed-methods study involved a convenience sample of English-speaking, female patients aged 13-19 seeking contraception services at an adolescent reproductive health clinic in Colorado, USA. Qualitative interviews informed development of clinical questionnaire items. The questionnaire elicited demographic characteristics, pregnancy and contraception use history, preferred contraception attributes, peer and family involvement, healthcare information and support needs, motivations for contraceptive use, and barriers to contraceptive services. We identified key decision-making factors and reduced the number of questionnaire items through principal components analysis. Using multivariable analyses, we examined the correlation between questionnaire responses and current contraceptive method.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty individuals participated in interviews and 373 individuals completed the preliminary questionnaire with 63 candidate items. We identified five contraceptive decision-making factors: side-effect avoidance (eight items, Cronbach's alpha = 0.84), preferred method attributes (six items, Cronbach's alpha = 0.67), parental involvement (three items, Cronbach's alpha = 0.67), life goals prior to parenting (four items, Cronbach's alpha = 0.88), and access to a contraceptive provider (two items, Cronbach's alpha = 0.92) and nine stand-alone items. In multivariable analyses, we found that questionnaire responses for decision-making factors varied among participants using different contraceptive methods.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Multiple priorities may influence adolescent contraceptive decisions. This clinical questionnaire can elicit these priorities before or during a healthcare encounter. Future studies should assess generalizability of the questionnaire and examine impact on method choice, continuation, satisfaction, and reproductive health outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":47632,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10773971/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1363/psrh.12242","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/8/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DEMOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Context: Adolescents need support to make informed decisions about contraception. Few clinical questionnaires exist to help adolescents and their healthcare providers align contraception decisions with patient needs and preferences.

Methods: Our mixed-methods study involved a convenience sample of English-speaking, female patients aged 13-19 seeking contraception services at an adolescent reproductive health clinic in Colorado, USA. Qualitative interviews informed development of clinical questionnaire items. The questionnaire elicited demographic characteristics, pregnancy and contraception use history, preferred contraception attributes, peer and family involvement, healthcare information and support needs, motivations for contraceptive use, and barriers to contraceptive services. We identified key decision-making factors and reduced the number of questionnaire items through principal components analysis. Using multivariable analyses, we examined the correlation between questionnaire responses and current contraceptive method.

Results: Twenty individuals participated in interviews and 373 individuals completed the preliminary questionnaire with 63 candidate items. We identified five contraceptive decision-making factors: side-effect avoidance (eight items, Cronbach's alpha = 0.84), preferred method attributes (six items, Cronbach's alpha = 0.67), parental involvement (three items, Cronbach's alpha = 0.67), life goals prior to parenting (four items, Cronbach's alpha = 0.88), and access to a contraceptive provider (two items, Cronbach's alpha = 0.92) and nine stand-alone items. In multivariable analyses, we found that questionnaire responses for decision-making factors varied among participants using different contraceptive methods.

Conclusions: Multiple priorities may influence adolescent contraceptive decisions. This clinical questionnaire can elicit these priorities before or during a healthcare encounter. Future studies should assess generalizability of the questionnaire and examine impact on method choice, continuation, satisfaction, and reproductive health outcomes.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
科罗拉多州一家青少年生殖健康诊所制定临床问卷以支持避孕决策。
背景:青少年需要支持,才能在知情的情况下做出避孕决定。很少有临床问卷可以帮助青少年及其医疗保健提供者根据患者的需求和偏好做出避孕决定。方法:我们的混合方法研究涉及一个在美国科罗拉多州一家青少年生殖健康诊所寻求避孕服务的13-19岁英语女性患者的方便样本。定性访谈为临床问卷项目的制定提供了信息。该问卷调查了人口统计学特征、妊娠和避孕使用史、首选避孕属性、同伴和家庭参与、医疗保健信息和支持需求、避孕使用动机以及避孕服务障碍。我们通过主成分分析确定了关键决策因素,并减少了问卷项目的数量。通过多变量分析,我们检验了问卷调查结果与现行避孕方法之间的相关性。结果:20人参加了面试,373人完成了初步问卷,共有63个候选项目。我们确定了五个避孕决策因素:避免副作用(八个项目,Cronbachα = 0.84),优选方法属性(六项,Cronbachα = 0.67),父母参与(三项,克朗巴赫α = 0.67),养育子女之前的生活目标(四项,Cronbachα = 0.88),以及获得避孕服务提供者(两项,Cronbachα = 0.92)和九个独立项目。在多变量分析中,我们发现使用不同避孕方法的参与者对决策因素的问卷反应各不相同。结论:多个优先事项可能会影响青少年的避孕决定。这份临床问卷可以在医疗保健遭遇之前或期间引出这些优先事项。未来的研究应评估问卷的可推广性,并检查对方法选择、持续性、满意度和生殖健康结果的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
3.40%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health provides the latest peer-reviewed, policy-relevant research and analysis on sexual and reproductive health and rights in the United States and other developed countries. For more than four decades, Perspectives has offered unique insights into how reproductive health issues relate to one another; how they are affected by policies and programs; and their implications for individuals and societies. Published four times a year, Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health includes original research, special reports and commentaries on the latest developments in the field of sexual and reproductive health, as well as staff-written summaries of recent findings in the field.
期刊最新文献
Understanding abortion legality and trimester of abortion care in Ohio, West Virginia and Kentucky, three abortion‐restrictive states Exploring adolescent-facing US clinicians' perceptions of their contraceptive counseling and use of shared decision-making: A qualitative study. "It shouldn't be just hush-hush": A qualitative community-based study of menstrual health communication among women in Philadelphia. Amicus brief of over 300 reproductive health researchers supports mifepristone's safety and effectiveness. Brief of over 300 reproductive health researchers as Amici Curiae in FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1