Contraception最新文献

Objectives: To evaluate medication abortion (MAB) outcomes for participants receiving intramuscular depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA) injections or subdermal etonogestrel implants concurrently with mifepristone compared to those who did not in a real-world setting.

Study design: This retrospective cohort study included MAB patients from one Planned Parenthood health center in St. Paul, MN, between 2017 and 2019. We abstracted electronic health records and compared sociodemographic variables, clinical information, and treatment failure rates (primary outcome) between study groups with logistic regression (generating odds ratios [OR] and 95% confidence intervals [CI]).

Results: Among 7296 MAB participants, 224 (3.1%) received DMPA injections and 309 (4.2%) received etonogestrel implants concurrently with mifepristone; 141 (62.9%) and 200 (64.7%) completed follow-up respectively. From a random sample of 1000, 990 comparison participants met inclusion criteria; 704 (71.1%) completed follow-up. Fourteen (9.9%) DMPA participants (aOR 4.26, 95% CI 1.87-9.68, p < 0.001) and 6 (3.0%) etonogestrel implant participants (aOR 1.38, 95% CI 0.48-3.55, p = 0.522) required additional treatment to empty the uterus and/or had an ongoing pregnancy, each contrasted with 15 (2.1%) comparison patients (models adjusted for gestational duration, patient age, parity, and race).

Conclusion: Although our study is limited by high rates of loss to follow-up, our analysis suggests that concurrent administration of DMPA with mifepristone may decrease MAB efficacy, while etonogestrel implant placement does not appear to alter MAB outcomes. These findings are overall consistent with prior literature and inform post-MAB contraception counseling.

Implications: This retrospective cohort study reinforces prior randomized controlled trial findings that concurrent depot medroxyprogesterone acetate injection with mifepristone administration may decrease medication abortion efficacy. Conversely, concurrent etonogestrel contraceptive implant placement with mifepristone administration does not appear to decrease medication abortion efficacy. These findings inform post-abortion contraception counseling.

Objectives: We tested abortion messaging to develop evidence-based communication recommendations for doctors who provide abortion care.

Study design: We conducted an online survey in a nationally representative sample of 1215 people, using National Opinion Research Center's Amerispeak Panel. We surveyed participants before and after viewing two brief videos featuring doctors who provide abortion care speaking about their work. Doctors' comments were grounded in strategic communications and applied psychology research, and emphasized caregiving roles, avoided political-sounding punditry, and acknowledged abortion's complexities. We assessed participants' characterizations of doctors, and how these characterizations impact support for abortion restrictions and views on abortion legality. We analyzed pre-post data using descriptive statistics, t tests, and multivariable regression.

Results: Postmessaging more participants endorsed positive descriptors of doctors who provide abortion care (p < 0.001, t = 8.99); fewer endorsed negative descriptors (p < 0.001, t = 10.32). Increased postmessaging endorsement of positive descriptors predicted declines in support for abortion restrictions (adjusted odds ratio = 1.69, p < 0.01); decreased endorsement of negative descriptors did not. After messaging, 37% of respondents said their views of doctors who provide abortion care made them less likely to support abortion restrictions, compared to 14% before (p < 0.001, t = -6.9). After messaging, there was more overall support for legal abortion and less for abortion being mostly illegal (46% to 48% and 24% to 22%, p < 0.001; t = -4.11).

Conclusions: When doctors who provide abortion care use messaging recommendations that include speaking about abortion's complexities and avoiding political-sounding punditry, they generate more support for legal abortion and less for restrictions.

Implications: The voices of doctors who provide abortion care shape public opinion. When doctors speak from caregiving perspectives, avoid punditry, and acknowledge abortion's complexities, they generate more support for legal abortion and less for restrictions. However, audiences may not be aware a priori that ideas of doctors shape their views.

Objectives: To investigate military medical students' attitudes toward contraception and abortion after clerkships.

Study design: We adapted a survey of civilian medical student attitudes for military students. We asked how clerkships changed perspectives and comfort discussing these topics.

Results: Eighty-five (85%) of 100 respondents felt more comfortable discussing contraception and abortion after clerkships. More students changed perspectives on contraception than abortion (29% vs 17%, p = 0.043). Students noted limited exposure to abortion.

Conclusions: Clerkships increased comfort discussing contraception and abortion but were unlikely to change their attitudes.

Implications: More exposure to abortion care is needed.

Objective: To summarize and update information regarding drug-drug interactions (DDIs) between antiretrovirals (ARVs) and hormonal contraceptives (HCs).

Study design: Systematic review.

Results: We included 49 articles, with clinical, ARV, or HC PK outcomes reported by 39, 25, and 30 articles, respectively, with some articles reporting outcomes in two or more categories. Fifteen of 18 articles assessing DDIs between efavirenz and progestin implants, emergency contraception, or combined hormonal intravaginal rings found higher pregnancy rates, luteal progesterone levels suggesting ovulation, or reduced progestin PK values. Five studies documented that CYP2B6 single nucleotide polymorphisms exacerbated this DDI. One cohort detected doubled bone density loss with concomitant depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA) and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF)-containing ART use versus TDF alone. No other studies described DDIs impacting clinical outcomes. Few adverse events were attributed to ARV-HC use with none exceeding Grade 2. Evidence quality was generally moderate, with dis-similar treatment and control groups, identifying and controlling for confounding, and minimizing attrition bias in the study design being the most frequent limitations.

Conclusion: TDF-DMPA DDIs warrant longer-term study on bone health and consideration of alternate combinations. For efavirenz-based ART, client counseling on relative risks, including both potential increase in pregnancy rate with concomitant efavirenz and implant use and lower pregnancy rates compared to other HCs even with concomitant efavirenz use, should continue to allow users comprehensive method choice.

Implications: Most ARVs and HCs may be used safely and effectively together. Efavirenz-based ART requires careful counseling and data for possible interactions between HCs and new ARV classes are anticipated.

Objective: Medication abortions now make up the majority of abortions in the US, with new service delivery models such as telehealth; however, it is unclear how this may impact patient experiences. The objective of the study is to adapt and validate a person-centered abortion care (PCAC) scale for medication abortions that was developed in a global South context (Kenya) for use in the United States.

Study design: This study includes medication abortion patients from a hospital-based clinic who had one of two modes of service delivery: 1) telemedicine with no physical exam or ultrasound; or 2) in-person with clinic-based exams and ultrasounds. We conducted a sequential approach to scale development including: 1) defining constructs and item generation; 2) expert reviews; 3) cognitive interviews (n=12); 4) survey development and online survey data collection (N=182, including 45 telemedicine patients and 137 in-person patients); and 5) psychometric analyses.

Results: Exploratory factor analyses identified 29-items for the US-PCAC scale with three subscales: 1) Respect & Dignity (10 items), 2) Responsive & Supportive Care (9 items for the full scale, 1 additional mode-specific item each for in-person and telemedicine), and 3) Communication & Autonomy (10 items for the full scale, 1 additional item for telemedicine). The US-PCAC had high content, construct, and criterion validity. It also had high reliability, with a standardized alpha for the full 29-item US-PCAC scale of 0.95. The US-PCAC score was associated with overall satisfaction.

Conclusion: This study found high validity and reliability of a newly-developed person-centered abortion care scale for use in the US. As medication abortion provision expands, this scale can be used in quality improvement efforts.

Implications: This study found high validity and reliability of a newly-developed person-centered care scale for use in the United States for in-person and telemedicine medication abortion.

Objective: To compare the incidence of expulsion for different copper intrauterine device (IUD) shapes.

Study design: We conducted a secondary analysis of the ongoing, prospective, non-interventional European Active Surveillance Study on LCS12 (EURAS-LCS12). Users of newly inserted IUDs were recruited in 10 European countries via a network of approximately 1200 clinicians. We restricted the analysis to copper IUD users. In the main analysis, we classified copper IUDs by shape [Nova-T frame, Tatum-T frame, Multiload frame, frameless IUDs and intrauterine balls], without differentiation of size. We calculated the cumulative incidence, crude, and adjusted hazard ratios for expulsion. Covariates included in the adjusted analyses were age, BMI, parity, education, income, IUD user status, marital status, length of device, heavy menstrual bleeding, and clinician's experience.

Results: We included 26,381 copper IUD users from the EURAS-LCS12 dataset for this study. The most frequently used IUD shape was the Nova-T frame (14,724 [55.8%]) followed by the Tatum-T frame (4276 [16.2%]), frameless IUDs (3374 [12.8%]), Multiload frame (2962 [11.2%]), and intrauterine balls (IUBs) (1045 [4.0%]). Cox regression analysis regarding expulsions yielded an adjusted hazard ratio of 0.8 (95% CI, 0.7-1.0), 1.3 (95% CI, 1.0-1.8), 1.6 (95% CI, 1.2-2.1) and 3.6 (95% CI, 2.7-4.9) for Nova-T frame IUD, frameless IUDs, Multiload frame IUDs and IUBs versus Tatum-T frame IUD, respectively.

Conclusion: The risk of expulsion following placement of a copper IUD is related to IUD shape, with Nova-T frame and Tatum-T frame IUDs demonstrating the lowest risk.

Implications: Our finding of a higher risk of expulsion observed with Multiload frame, frameless, and intrauterine ball copper IUDs compared to Tatum-T frame and Nova-T frame devices during real world use has clinical importance. Clinicians may choose to use these data when counseling patients.