Cristina M Gheorghe, Olivia Slack, Amanda D Wilson
{"title":"A thematic analysis of the perceptions of reversible inhibition of sperm under guidance as a potential family planning method in the United Kingdom.","authors":"Cristina M Gheorghe, Olivia Slack, Amanda D Wilson","doi":"10.1177/03915603241261813","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This exploratory study aimed to look into public perceptions of Reversible Inhibition of Sperm Under Guidance (RISUG) as a family planning method in the United Kingdom (UK). It also aimed to discover if there were any sex differences in perceptions between males and females.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Twelve semi-structured interviews were conducted, six with males and six with females, all residents of the UK.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The audio data from the interviews then was transcribed for analysis. An inductive and a semantic thematic analysis was conducted on the data set.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Three main themes were constructed, including: (i) RISUG Hesitancy, (ii) Females perceived benefits of RISUG and (iii) Males perceived concerns regarding RISUG. Hesitancy was related to vaccination hesitancy, females wanted males to have more reproductive autonomy and males placed their concerns through the lens of 'other' males that their may be unintended side effects. Together these three themes represent both perceived risk and overall benefits of the method. However, while randomized control trails have been completed to standard for RISUG, males perceived concerns, suggesting a disconnect between the public's perceptions and professionals understanding of trails.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>RISUG was perceived as a viable option for family planning in the future, however trust of the new contraceptive method will need to be fostered among the public in order to effectively transfer knowledge on the potential side effects and the standard of pre-market testing for these. Effective public health messages can result in better education of people concerning the new contraceptive method, including the risks and benefits. By using perceptions to inform health messages around RISUG, researchers and practitioners can learn from potential users how to best address misinformation or concerns, while at the same time building an evidence base for when new male methods reach the contraceptive market.</p>","PeriodicalId":23574,"journal":{"name":"Urologia Journal","volume":" ","pages":"819-823"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11484156/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urologia Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/03915603241261813","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: This exploratory study aimed to look into public perceptions of Reversible Inhibition of Sperm Under Guidance (RISUG) as a family planning method in the United Kingdom (UK). It also aimed to discover if there were any sex differences in perceptions between males and females.
Design: Twelve semi-structured interviews were conducted, six with males and six with females, all residents of the UK.
Methods: The audio data from the interviews then was transcribed for analysis. An inductive and a semantic thematic analysis was conducted on the data set.
Results: Three main themes were constructed, including: (i) RISUG Hesitancy, (ii) Females perceived benefits of RISUG and (iii) Males perceived concerns regarding RISUG. Hesitancy was related to vaccination hesitancy, females wanted males to have more reproductive autonomy and males placed their concerns through the lens of 'other' males that their may be unintended side effects. Together these three themes represent both perceived risk and overall benefits of the method. However, while randomized control trails have been completed to standard for RISUG, males perceived concerns, suggesting a disconnect between the public's perceptions and professionals understanding of trails.
Conclusion: RISUG was perceived as a viable option for family planning in the future, however trust of the new contraceptive method will need to be fostered among the public in order to effectively transfer knowledge on the potential side effects and the standard of pre-market testing for these. Effective public health messages can result in better education of people concerning the new contraceptive method, including the risks and benefits. By using perceptions to inform health messages around RISUG, researchers and practitioners can learn from potential users how to best address misinformation or concerns, while at the same time building an evidence base for when new male methods reach the contraceptive market.