Clinical Review

2022 Update on contraception

Author and Disclosure Information

The US Supreme Court overturned Roe v Wade in June 2022. Further rulings could create additional or new barriers to contraception use in the near future for patients in many states. As clinicians and advocates, how can we work now to reduce existing burdens and minimize the potential impact of future restrictions?


 

References

On June 24, 2022, the US Supreme Court ruled in Dobbs v Jackson to overturn the landmark Roe v Wade decision, deeming that abortion is not protected by statutes that provide the right to privacy, liberty, or autonomy. With this historic ruling, other rights founded on the same principles, including the freedom to use contraception, may be called into question in the future. Clinics that provide abortion care typically play a vital role in providing contraception services. Due to abortion restriction across the country, many of these clinics are predicted to close and many have already closed. Within one month of the Dobbs decision, 43 clinics in 11 states had shut their doors to patients, reducing access to basic contraception services.1 It is more important now than ever that clinicians address barriers and lead the effort to improve and ensure that patients have access to contraceptive services.

In this Update, we review recent evidence that may help aid patients in obtaining contraception more easily and for longer periods of time. We review strategies demonstrated to improve contraceptive access, including how to increase prescribing rates of 1-year contraceptive supplies and pharmacist-prescribed contraception. We also review new data on extended use of the levonorgestrel 52 mg intrauterine device (LNG 52 mg IUD).

One-year prescribing of hormonal contraception decreases an access barrier

Uhm S, Chen MJ, Cutler ED, et al. Twelve-month prescribing of contraceptive pill, patch, and ring before and after a standardized electronic medical record order change. Contraception. 2021;103:60-63.

Providing a 1-year supply of self-administered contraception can lead to higher likelihood of continued use and is associated with reduced cost, unintended pregnancy, and abortion rates.2-4 Although some patients may not use a full year’s supply of pills, rings, or patches under such programs, the lower rates of unintended pregnancy result in significant cost savings as compared with the unused contraceptives.2,3 Accordingly, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) advises dispensing a 1-year supply of self-administered hormonal contraception.5 Insurance coverage and providers’ prescribing practices can be barriers to patients obtaining a year’s supply of hormonal contraception. Currently, 18 states and the District of Columbia legally require insurers to cover a 12-month supply of prescription contraceptives (FIGURE 1). Despite these laws and the CDC recommendation, studies show that most people continue to receive only a 1- to 3-month supply.6-8 One strategy to increase the number of 1-year supplies of self-administered contraception is institutional changes to default prescription orders.

Study design

In California, legislation enacted in January 2017 required commercial and medical assistance health plans to cover up to 12 months of US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved self-administered hormonal contraceptives dispensed at 1 time as prescribed or requested. To better serve patients, a multidisciplinary team from the University of California Davis Health worked with the institution’s pharmacy to institute an electronic medical record (EMR) default order change from dispensing 1-month with refills to dispensing 12-month quantities for all combined and progestin-only pills, patches, and rings on formulary.

After this EMR order change in December 2019, Uhm and colleagues conducted a retrospective pre-post study using outpatient prescription data that included nearly 5,000 contraceptive pill, patch, and ring prescriptions over an 8-month period. They compared the frequency of 12-month prescriptions for each of these methods 4 months before and 4 months after the default order change. They compared the proportion of 12-month prescriptions by prescriber department affiliation and by clinic location. Department affiliation was categorized as obstetrics-gynecology or non–obstetrics-gynecology. Clinic location was categorized as medical center campus or community clinics.

Increase in 12-month prescriptions

The authors found an overall increase in 12-month prescriptions, from 11% to 27%, after the EMR order change. Prescribers at the medical center campus clinics more frequently ordered a 12-month supply compared with prescribers at community clinics both before (33% vs 4%, respectively) and after (53% vs 19%, respectively) the EMR change. The only group of providers without a significant increase in 12-month prescriptions was among obstetrics-gynecology providers at community clinics (4% before vs 6% after).

The system EMR change modified only the standard facility order settings and did not affect individual favorite orders, which may help explain the differences in prescribing practices. While this study found an increase in 12-month prescriptions, there were no data on the actual number of supplies a patient received or on reimbursement.

WHAT THIS EVIDENCE MEANS FOR PRACTICE
The study by Uhm and colleagues showed that making a relatively simple change to default EMR orders can increase 12-month contraception prescribing and lead to greater patient-centered care. Evidence shows that providers and pharmacists are not necessarily aware of laws that require 12-month supply coverage and routinely prescribe smaller supplies.6,7,9 For clinicians in states that have these laws (FIGURE 1), we urge you to provide as full a supply of contraceptives as possible as this approach is both evidence based and patient centered. Although this study shows the benefit of universal system change to the EMR, individual clinicians also must be sure to modify personal order preferences. In addition, pharmacists can play an important role by updating policies that comply with these laws and by increasing pharmacy stocks of contraception supplies.7 For those living in states that do not currently have these laws, we encourage you to reach out to your legislators to advocate for similar laws as the data show clear medical and cost benefits for patients and society.

Continue to: Pharmacist prescription of hormonal contraception is safe and promotes continuation...

Pages

Recommended Reading

Tin in permanent contraception implants causes toxicity
MDedge ObGyn
Women are not being warned that anesthetic may reduce birth pill efficacy
MDedge ObGyn
Double morning-after pill dose for women with obesity not effective
MDedge ObGyn
Male contraceptive pill appears feasible in very early trials
MDedge ObGyn
Hormonal contraceptives protective against suicide?
MDedge ObGyn
IUD injury risk rises shortly after women give birth
MDedge ObGyn
No more ‘escape hatch’: Post Roe, new worries about meds linked to birth defects
MDedge ObGyn
Best practices for evaluating pelvic pain in patients with Essure tubal occlusion devices
MDedge ObGyn
In California, abortion could become a constitutional right. So could birth control.
MDedge ObGyn
Isotretinoin prescribers need better education on emergency contraception
MDedge ObGyn