Advance provision of emergency contraception for pregnancy prevention (Review)

Background Emergency contraception can prevent pregnancy when taken after unprotected intercourse.Obtaining emergency contraception within the recommended time frame is difficult for many women. Advance provision could circumvent some obstacles to timely use. Objectives To summarize randomized controlled trials evaluating advance provision of emergency contraception to explore effects on pregnancy rates, sexually transmitted infections, and sexual and contraceptive behaviors. Search strategy In November 2009, we searched CENTRAL, EMBASE, POPLINE,MEDLINE via PubMed, and a specialized emergency contraception article database. We also searched reference lists and contacted experts to identify additional published or unpublished trials. Selection criteria We included randomized controlled trials comparing advance provision and standard access (i.e., counseling whichmay ormay not have included information about emergency contraception, or provision of emergency contraception on request at a clinic or pharmacy). Data collection and analysis Two reviewers independently abstracted data and assessed study quality. We entered and analyzed data using RevMan 5.0.23. Main results Eleven randomized controlled trials met our criteria for inclusion, representing 7695 patients in the United States, China, India and Sweden. Advance provision did not decrease pregnancy rates (odds ratio (OR) 0.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76 to 1.25 in studies for which we included twelve-month follow-up data; OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.18 to 1.29 in a study with seven-month follow-up data; OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.20 in studies for which we included six-month follow-up data; OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.09 to 2.74 in a study with three-month follow-up data), despite reported increased use (single use: OR 2.47, 95% CI 1.80 to 3.40; multiple use: OR 4.13, 95% CI 1.77 to 9.63) and faster use (weighted mean difference (WMD) -12.98 hours, 95% CI -16.66 to -9.31 hours). Advance provision did not lead to increased rates of sexually transmitted infections (OR 1.01, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.37), increased frequency of unprotected intercourse, or changes in contraceptive methods.Women who received emergency contraception in advance were equally likely to use condoms as other women. Authors’ conclusions Advance provision of emergency contraception did not reduce pregnancy rates when compared to conventional provision. Results from primary analyses suggest that advance provision does not negatively impact sexual and reproductive health behaviors and outcomes. Women should have easy access to emergency contraception, because it can decrease the chance of pregnancy.However, the interventions tested thus far have not reduced overall pregnancy rates in the populations studied.

Thinking Ethically About Emergency Contraception.

http://www.chausa.org/docs/default-source/health-progress/hp1001l-pdf.pdf?sfvrsn=0

What you should know about emergency contraception /

"1/05."

Provision of the emergency contraceptive pill without prescription : attitudes and practices of pharmacists in Australia

Background : As 5 years have elapsed since the emergency contraceptive pill (ECP) was made available without prescription in Australia, information was sought about the current attitudes and practices of pharmacists in relation to their increased role in ECP provision.

Study Design : A mail survey was implemented; questionnaires were distributed to 750 pharmacies across Australia during 2008-2009. Descriptive statistics were calculated and multiple logistic regression was used to examine factors associated with declining to dispense ECP.

Results : Response rate was 29%. Most pharmacists used a protocol to guide ECP dispensing (77.3%) and the majority had declined ECP provision (75.1%) in certain circumstances. Many usually counselled where confidentiality could be assured (62.8%), and agreed that it is a pharmacist's role to counsel on regular contraception (81.9%). Factors significantly associated (p≤.05) with dispensing practices included pharmacists' attitudes towards acceptability of advance prescription, their age, gender and pharmacy accessibility.

Conclusions : New information about Australian pharmacists' current attitudes and practices towards ECP dispensing was identified. Pharmacists had stronger, more conservative attitudes than overseas pharmacists; however, the issues that emerged were similar to those reported overseas. To address these, revised training for local pharmacists is recommended.

Revisión sistemática de la literatura : AINES en la disrupción ovulatoria y posible uso en anticoncepción de emergencia

La anticoncepción de emergencia a nivel mundial no ha mostrado el impacto esperado en disminuir la tasa de embarazo no deseados. El uso de nuevos medicamentos como los antiinflamatorios no esteroideos (AINES), al alterar el proceso ovulatorio, como una opción para la anticoncepción de emergencia, podría mejorar este resultado. Objetivo: Realizar una revisión sistemática de la literatura para determinar la efectividad de los AINES en alterar el proceso de la ovulación y posible uso en la anticoncepción de emergencia. Materiales y métodos: Se realizó una búsqueda sistemática y ampliada ensayos clínicos acerca de la efectividad de los AINES en la inhibición o retardo de la ovulación. Resultados: En total se encontraron 59 artículos, de los cuales siete cumplieron con los criterios de elegibilidad. Se evaluaron diferentes tipos de inhibidores de la Cicloxigenasa-COX (selectivos y no selectivos), encontrando tasas entre 75% hasta del 100% en la disrupción de la ovulación en las mujeres que recibieron COX-2 selectivos y un gradiente dosis-respuesta. Conclusiones: Los resultados de esta revisión sistemática de la literatura sugieren la efectividad de los AINES (específicamente los COX-2 selectivos) en la alteración de la ovulación y su potencial uso como medicamento para la anticoncepción de emergencia. Se requieren más ensayos clínicos con mayores tamaños de muestra que evalúen esta opción terapéutica.

Pharmacy access to the emergency contraceptive pill : a national survey of a random sample of Australian women

Background : The emergency contraceptive pill (ECP) has the potential to assist in reducing unintended pregnancy and abortion rates. Since its rescheduling to pharmacy availability without prescription in Australia in January 2004, there is little information about Australian women's knowledge, attitudes and use of the ECP. The aim of this study was to measure the knowledge about the ECP and sociodemographic patterns of and barriers to use of the ECP.

Study Design : A cross-sectional study, using a computer-assisted telephone interview (CATI) survey conducted with a national random sample of 632 Australian women aged 16–35 years.

Results : Most women had heard of the ECP (95%) and 26% had used it. The majority of women agreed with pharmacy availability of the ECP (72%); however, only 48% were aware that it was available from pharmacies without a prescription. About a third (32%) believed the ECP to be an abortion pill. The most common reason for not using the ECP was that women did not think they were at risk of getting pregnant (57%). Logistic regression showed that women aged 20–29 years (OR 2.58; CI: 1.29–5.19) and 30–35 years (OR 3.16; CI: 1.47–6.80) were more likely to have used the ECP than those aged 16–19 years. Women with poor knowledge of the ECP were significantly less likely to have used it than those with very good knowledge (OR 0.28; CI: 0.09–0.77). Those in a de facto relationship (OR 2.21; CI: 1.27–3.85), in a relationship but not living with the partner (OR 2.46; 95% CI 1.31–4.63) or single women (OR 2.40; CI: 1.33–4.34) were more likely to have used the ECP than married women.

Conclusions : Women in Australia have a high level of awareness of the ECP, but more information and education about how to use it and where to obtain it are still needed.

Does Immediate Access to Birth Control Help Prevent Pregnancy? A Comparison of Onsite Provision Versus Off Campus Referral for Contraception at Two School-Based Clinics

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of different policies on access to hormonal contraception and pregnancy rates at two high school-based clinics. METHODS: Two clinics in high schools (Schools A and B), located in a large urban district in the southwest US, provide primary medical care to enrolled students with parental consent; the majority of whom have no health insurance coverage. The hormonal contraceptive dispensing policy of at School clinic A involves providing barrier, hormonal and emergency contraceptive services on site. School clinic B uses a referral policy that directs students to obtain contraception at an off-campus affiliated family planning clinic. Baseline data (age, race and history of prior pregnancy) on female students seeking hormonal contraception at the two clinics between 9/2008-12/2009 were extracted from an electronic administrative database (AHLERS Integrated System). Data on birth control use and pregnancy tests for each student was then tracked electronically through 3/31/2010. The outcomes measures were accessing hormonal contraception and positive pregnancy tests at any point during or after birth control use were started through 12/2009. The appointment keeping rate for contraceptive services and the overall pregnancy rates were compared between the two schools. In addition the pregnancy rates were compared between the two schools for students with and without a prior history of pregnancy. RESULTS: School clinic A: 79 students sought hormonal contraception; mean age 17.5 years; 68% were > 18 years; 77% were Hispanic; and 20% reported prior pregnancy. The mean duration of the observation period was 13 months (4-19 months). All 79 students received hormonal contraception (65% pill and 35% long acting progestin injection) onsite. During the observation period, the overall pregnancy rate was 6% (5/79); 4.7% (3/63) among students with no prior pregnancy. School clinic B: 40 students sought hormonal contraception; mean age 17.5 years; 52% > 18 years; 88 % were Hispanic; and 7.5% reported prior pregnancy. All 40 students were referred to the affiliated clinic. The mean duration of the observation period was 11.9 months (4-19 months). 50% (20) kept their appointment. Pills were dispensed to 85% (17/20) and 15% (3/20) received long acting progestin injection. The overall pregnancy rate was 20% (8/40); 21.6% (8/37) among students with no prior pregnancy. A significantly higher frequency of students seeking hormonal contraception kept their initial appointment for birth control at the school dispensing onsite contraception compared to the school with a referral policy for contraception (p<0.05). The pregnancy rate was significantly higher for the school with a referral policy for contraception compared to the school with onsite contraceptive services (p< 0.05). The pregnancy rate was also significantly higher for students without a prior history of pregnancy in the school with a referral policy for contraception (21.6%) versus the school with onsite contraceptive services (4.7%) (p< 0.05). CONCLUSION: This preliminary study showed that School clinic B with a referral policy had a lower appointment keeping rate for contraceptive services and a higher pregnancy rate than School clinic A with on-site contraceptive services. An on-site dispensing policy for hormonal contraceptives at high school-based health clinics may be a convenient and effective approach to prevent unintended first and repeat pregnancies among adolescents who seek hormonal contraception. This study has strong implications for reproductive health policy, especially as directed toward high-risk teenage populations.