Original research articleAttitudes towards long-acting reversible methods of contraception in general practice in the UK
Introduction
Long-acting reversible methods of contraception [implants, injections and intrauterine devices (IUDs) and systems] are highly effective, do not interfere with intercourse and require little or no on-going attention. Implants and injections have both been shown to be associated with a lower risk of conception, particularly among young users, than pills or condoms [1], [2], and there is evidence that their increased use may have considerable potential in reducing teenage pregnancy rates [3].
The uptake of long-acting reversible methods of contraception is low in Britain; only 10% of women aged 16 to 49 were using any of these methods in 2005/2006 compared with 23% of women using the oral contraceptive pill and 21% the condom [4]. Among 16 to 17 year olds, 12% used injectables or implants compared with 61% using the pill [4]. In the past, long-acting methods of contraception have been out of favor [5], [6]. Criticism focussed on risks of inappropriate and excessive use, coercive prescribing, reports of unpleasant and adverse ‘side effects’ and women's lack of control over mode of delivery [6], [7], [8]. This reputation is increasingly seen as undeserved [9]. Guidance on LARC published by the National Institute of Clinical Health and Excellence (NICE) in England in 2005 suggested that these methods have greater potential for reducing unintended pregnancy rates than has thus far been realized [10].
The majority of women attend general practice for their contraceptive provision in the UK, and supplies are free of charge under the National Health Services. Since all long-acting contraceptive methods require medical intervention, attitudes of health care professionals are important determinants of prevalence of use. Yet, little information exists on practitioners' views on such methods [11] and what there is has been collected outside of the UK [12]. This study addresses this deficit, by exploring the reported prescribing preferences of health care professionals in general practice in the UK, and their views on the safety, efficacy and acceptability of long-acting reversible methods of contraception compared with other methods.
Section snippets
Methods
A questionnaire survey was used to investigate the prescribing preferences of health care professionals with regard to methods of contraception, with particular reference to injectables (Depo Provera®) and implants (Implanon®) since they are most likely to be used by young people. In April 2005, fully structured and scheduled, self-completion questionnaires were mailed to 215 general practitioners (GPs) and 205 practice nurses and nurse practitioners. Practices were recruited from the Medical
Results
Three hundred and twenty-one questionnaires were returned, 169 of respondents were GPs, 148 nurse practitioners and practice nurses, and four did not specify their role within general practice. Eighty-three (26%) of the respondents were male and 238 (74%) female. Two hundred and thirty-seven (74%) were aged 50 or under and 83 (26%) were aged over 50 (one did not specify age). One hundred (31%) were working in a practice situated in the most socio-economically disadvantaged quintile of the
Discussion
Long-acting methods of contraception are regarded by providers as safe and easy to use and are rated more highly than other methods on efficacy. In this last respect their views are consistent with the data on efficacy which show the prevalence of unintended pregnancy in the first year of typical use by women of a contraceptive method to be 3% for Depo Provera®; 0.1% for Mirena; and 0.05% for implants, compared with 8% for the combined pill or minipill; 21% for condoms and 16% for diaphragms
Acknowledgments
The Nuffield Foundation funded this research. The authors' work was independent of the funders and the funding source had no involvement. We are grateful to Rachael Parker for co-ordinating fieldwork and data entry, Toni Belfield and Rebecca French for their helpful advice in the design of the study, and Nicky Fasey and Kay Foulger at the MRC GPRF for their assistance in recruiting subjects. We also thank the study participants.
All authors declare they have no conflict of interest.
References (22)
- et al.
A village would be nice but……It takes a long-acting contraceptive to prevent repeat adolescent pregnancies
Am J Prev Med
(2001) - et al.
A longitudinal study of birth control and pregnancy outcome among women in a Swedish population
Contraception
(1997) - et al.
Reasons for contraception discontinuation in women 20–39 years old in New Zealand
Contraception
(1999) - et al.
Condom practices of urban teens using Norplant contraceptive implants, oral contraceptives and condoms for contraception
Am J Obstet Gynecol
(1998) - et al.
Why is teenage pregnancy declining? The roles of abstinence, sexual activity and contraceptive use
(1999) - et al.
Contraception and sexual health 2005/06. A report on research using the ONS Omnibus Survey produced by the Office for National Statistics on behalf of the Department of Health, London
(2006) Reproductive rights and wrongs: the global politics of population control and contraceptive choice
(1987)Contraceptive research: women's perspectives.
- et al.
Questions of balance: issues emerging from the introduction of the hormonal implant
Fam Plan Perspec
(1993) When the pill gets under your skin
New Scientist
(1993)
On the needless hounding of a safe contraceptive
The Economist
Cited by (93)
Preventive activities in women. PAPPS update 2022
2022, Atencion PrimariaHealth workers’ values and preferences regarding contraceptive methods globally: A systematic review
2022, ContraceptionCitation Excerpt :Contraceptive method characteristics discussed in these articles included efficacy, safety, effect on the menstrual cycle and bleeding pattern, contraindications, convenience, good and adverse side effects, visibility of the method, ease of use, frequency of intake or administration, method of administration (e.g. barrier, oral, patch, ring, insertion, injection), duration of use, onset of action, ease of removal or discontinuation, STI prevention, accessibility and affordability, and time to return to fertility. Four studies from Australia [29,33], Sweden [34], and the United Kingdom [53] found that a contraceptive method's effect on menstrual periods and bleeding could be taken as a positive or negative side effect, depending on the contraceptive user's preferences, and often influenced health worker preferences and counseling. Two cross-sectional studies from high-income countries mentioned preferences of methods for lactating women [20,24]: 1 study from the United States found that postpartum nurses did not prefer provision of medroxyprogesterone intramuscular injection in postpartum women due to their personal beliefs regarding its effect on lactation and decrease in milk production, despite receiving training on its benefits [20], and another study from Germany found that health workers more often recommended lactating women use progesterone-only contraceptive methods like POP and LNG-IUD [24].
The effect of mobile video training for healthcare providers on long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARC) use among adolescents and young women
2021, Journal of Pediatric and Adolescent GynecologyCitation Excerpt :In the United States, LARC use among college women aged 18–24 years is at 7.9%.15 One of the biggest obstacles preventing the widespread use of LARCs among adolescents and young nulliparous women is providers’ lack of healthcare knowledge.8,16-18 Moreover, negative attitudes and infrequent practices regarding LARC use for adolescents and young women are common among healthcare providers.
Reasons for rejecting hormonal contraception in Western countries: A systematic review
2021, Social Science and MedicinePreventive activities in women's care
2020, Atencion PrimariaThe French “pill scare”: Did women go to a gynecologist more often to have an easier access to the IUD?
2020, Revue d'Epidemiologie et de Sante Publique