» Articles » PMID: 25126137

Impact of Emergency Contraception Status on Unintended Pregnancy: Observational Data from a Women's Health Practice

Overview
Date 2014 Aug 16
PMID 25126137
Citations 2
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to determine if nonprescription emergency contraception (EC) availability impacted self-reported unintended pregnancy rates and to assess women's knowledge and awareness of EC prior to and after nonprescription availability.

Methods: A survey regarding contraception use and knowledge was verbally administered to a cross-sectional, convenience sample of 272 pregnant women receiving prenatal care at a large urban community women's clinic between August 2003 and October 2008. Statistical analyses determined the differences between two groups (before [BA] and after, [AA] non-prescription EC availability in the U.S. drug market) in terms of self-reported unintended pregnancy rates, knowledge and awareness of EC.

Results: The AA group reported higher incidence of unintended pregnancy when compared to the BA group (90.7% vs. 72.7%, P = 0.0172). The majority of both groups reported that they were not using any contraception at the time of conception (BA-84.4%; AA-83.3%). There was no significant difference in the participants' awareness of EC between the two groups (BA-46.8% vs. AA-43.0%) nor was there a significant difference between the two groups in the self-reported willingness to use EC in the future (BA-53.1% vs. AA-63.4%). However, among participants who were unaware of EC, 61% reported they would consider using it in the future after receiving brief EC counseling from a pharmacist or student pharmacist. Neither age nor pregnancy intention was associated with self-reported EC awareness but there was an association with income (P = 0.0410) and education (P = 0.0021).

Conclusion: The change from prescription-only to non-prescription status of EC in the U.S. drug market did not impact the unintended pregnancy rate in this patient population. Lack of knowledge and awareness is still a major barrier to widespread EC use.

Citing Articles

Over-the-counter provision of emergency contraceptive pills: a systematic review.

Atkins K, Kennedy C, Yeh P, Narasimhan M BMJ Open. 2022; 12(3):e054122.

PMID: 35288384 PMC: 8921871. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-054122.


Knowledge of, beliefs about, and perceived barriers to the use of the emergency contraception pill among women aged 18-51 in Nova Scotia.

Whelan A, Langille D, White S, Asbridge M, Flowerdew G Pharm Pract (Granada). 2013; 9(3):148-55.

PMID: 24367469 PMC: 3870174.

References
1.
Trussell J, Koenig J, Ellertson C, Stewart F . Preventing unintended pregnancy: the cost-effectiveness of three methods of emergency contraception. Am J Public Health. 1997; 87(6):932-7. PMC: 1380926. DOI: 10.2105/ajph.87.6.932. View

2.
Ranney M, Gee E, Merchant R . Nonprescription availability of emergency contraception in the United States: current status, controversies, and impact on emergency medicine practice. Ann Emerg Med. 2006; 47(5):461-71. DOI: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2005.07.001. View

3.
Baldwin S, Solorio R, Washington D, Yu H, Huang Y, Brown E . Who is using emergency contraception? Awareness and use of emergency contraception among California women and teens. Womens Health Issues. 2008; 18(5):360-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.whi.2008.06.005. View

4.
. Randomised controlled trial of levonorgestrel versus the Yuzpe regimen of combined oral contraceptives for emergency contraception. Task Force on Postovulatory Methods of Fertility Regulation. Lancet. 1998; 352(9126):428-33. View

5.
Trussell J, Ellertson C, Stewart F, Raymond E, Shochet T . The role of emergency contraception. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004; 190(4 Suppl):S30-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2004.01.063. View