Although IUDs are effective as emergency contraception, few young women knew about this use of the device, according to a recent, multisite survey published in Contraception.
Only 7.5% of young female participants in a recent study had heard that the IUD could be used for emergency contraception (EC), according to a cluster-randomized trial of 1,500 women aged 18-25 years receiving contraception counseling at 40 U.S. Planned Parenthood centers. Race, ethnicity, and insurance status had no effect on the likelihood that a woman would know about IUDs as EC.
However, the study found, 68% of women surveyed would want to know about IUD use for EC, and those for whom a pregnancy would cause the most unhappiness were especially likely to want to know about this option (adjusted odds ratio, 1.26; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.58; P = .04). Again, demographic factors did not affect the likelihood that women would want to know about the IUD as an alternative to EC pills.
“In this 40-site U.S. study of sexually active young women, very few had heard of the IUD as a form of EC or knew of its significantly higher efficacy compared to EC pills, but most would desire to learn about it if they needed EC,” wrote Suzan Goodman, MD, MPH, and her coauthors.
Office visits where women request EC “provide a unique and time-sensitive opportunity to prevent an unwanted pregnancy, as well as to offer ongoing contraception,” wrote Dr. Goodman of the University of California, San Francisco, and her coauthors. But previous work showed that teens and young women are not generally well-informed about EC, including the window of effectiveness and methods that can be used for EC.
Dr. Goodman and her collaborators conducted a secondary analysis of a cluster-randomized trial that delivered a 4-hour training module to half of the Planned Parenthood centers; the evidence-based training focused on contraceptive counseling, long-acting reversible contraception, and IUD placement. Patients seen at the 40 centers were surveyed before receiving contraception counseling, and at 3 and 6 months post counseling.
Participant assignment to a center where the intervention had been administered to clinic staff had no bearing on how likely they were to have heard that IUDs could be used as EC.
Of the original survey respondents, who were young women not intending to become pregnant for at least 12 months, a total of 1,138 participants completed the relevant portions of the survey. The mean age of the respondents was 21.5 years, and were mostly (94%) never married. About one-quarter (26%) had private insurance, 31% had public insurance, and 38% were uninsured. About half were white, one-quarter were black, and 17% identified as Hispanic.
Study participants were very likely to view a doctor or nurse as their most trusted sources of information about EC, with 91% identifying this source over the Internet (6%) or friends (2%). Previous work, Dr. Goodman and her colleagues wrote, has found that women are more likely to consider an IUD if they had heard about it from a health care provider.
Although incorporating the ability to place an IUD at an EC visit may present some challenges in terms of clinic work flow and staff training, it’s an option that should be considered for many reasons, the authors noted.
IUDs are overall more effective than EC pills, with marked advantages in some instances: IUDs have higher efficacy in women with obesity, for women who have had multiple episodes of intercourse within the 5-day efficacy window, and for women at the fertile point of their menstrual cycles. Once inserted, they afford the additional advantage of ongoing protection against pregnancy.
“Contraceptive education should explicitly address IUD as EC,” wrote Dr. Goodman and her coauthors. “A coordinated effort to improve counseling, provider training, and same-day access to IUD as EC will be critical to offering women their full range of contraceptive options.”
This study was funded by the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation and the National Institutes of Health. Dr. Goodman reported no conflicts of interest. Two study coauthors are employees of Planned Parenthood, which participates in unrelated studies funded by HRA Pharma.
SOURCE: Goodman S et al. Contraception. 2018 Apr 18. doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2018.04.009.