Advertisement

The role of contraceptive attributes in women’s contraceptive decision making

Published:January 30, 2015DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2015.01.051

      Objective

      Contraceptive methods have differing attributes. Women’s preferences for these attributes may influence contraceptive decision making. Our objective was to identify women’s contraceptive preferences among women initiating a new contraceptive method.

      Study Design

      We conducted a cross-sectional, self-administered survey of women’s contraceptive preferences at the time of enrollment into the Contraceptive CHOICE Project. Participants were asked to rank the importance of 15 contraceptive attributes on a 3-point scale (1 = not at all important, 2 = somewhat important, and 3 = very important) and then to rank the 3 attributes that were the most important when choosing a contraceptive method. The survey also contained questions about prior contraceptive experience and barriers to contraceptive use. Information about demographic and reproductive characteristics was collected through the CHOICE Project baseline survey.

      Results

      There were 2590 women who completed the survey. Our sample was racially and socioeconomically diverse. Method attributes with the highest importance score (mean score [SD]) were effectiveness (2.97 [0.18]), safety (2.96 [0.22]), affordability (2.61 [0.61]), whether the method is long lasting (2.58 [0.61]), and whether the method is “forgettable” (2.54 [0.66]). The attributes most likely to be ranked by respondents among the top 3 attributes included effectiveness (84.2%), safety (67.8%), and side effects of the method (44.6%).

      Conclusion

      Multiple contraceptive attributes influence decision making and no single attribute drives most women’s decisions. Tailoring communication and helping women make complex tradeoffs between attributes can better support their contraceptive decisions and may assist them in making value-consistent choices. This process could improve continuation and satisfaction.

      Key words

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Mosher W.D.
        • Jones J.
        Use of contraception in the United States: 1982-2008.
        Vital Health Stat 23. 2010; 29: 1-44
        • O'Connor A.M.
        Validation of a decisional conflict scale.
        Med Decis Making. 1995; 15: 25-30
        • Lessard L.N.
        • Karasek D.
        • Ma S.
        • et al.
        Contraceptive features preferred by women at high risk of unintended pregnancy.
        Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2012; 44: 194-200
        • Mansour D.
        International survey to assess women's attitudes regarding choice of daily versus nondaily female hormonal contraception.
        Int J Womens Health. 2014; 6: 367-375
        • Donnelly K.Z.
        • Foster T.C.
        • Thompson R.
        What matters most? The content and concordance of patients' and providers' information priorities for contraceptive decision making.
        Contraception. 2014; 90: 280-287
        • Grady W.R.
        • Klepinger D.H.
        • Nelson-Wally A.
        Contraceptive characteristics: the perceptions and priorities of men and women.
        Fam Plann Perspect. 1999; 31: 168-175
        • Lamvu G.
        • Steiner M.J.
        • Condon S.
        • Hartmann K.
        Consistency between most important reasons for using contraception and current method used: the influence of health care providers.
        Contraception. 2006; 73: 399-403
        • Trussell J.
        Contraceptive failure in the United States.
        Contraception. 2011; 83: 397-404
        • Secura G.M.
        • Allsworth J.E.
        • Madden T.
        • Mullersman J.L.
        • Peipert J.F.
        The Contraceptive CHOICE Project: reducing barriers to long-acting reversible contraception.
        Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010; 203: 115.e1-115.e7
        • Madden T.
        • Mullersman J.L.
        • Omvig K.J.
        • Secura G.M.
        • Peipert J.F.
        Structured contraceptive counseling provided by the Contraceptive CHOICE Project.
        Contraception. 2013; 88: 243-249
        • Peipert J.F.
        • Madden T.
        • Allsworth J.E.
        • Secura G.M.
        Preventing unintended pregnancies by providing no-cost contraception.
        Obstet Gynecol. 2012; 120: 1291-1297
        • Finer L.B.
        • Jerman J.
        • Kavanaugh M.L.
        Changes in use of long-acting contraceptive methods in the United States, 2007-2009.
        Fertil Steril. 2012; 98: 893-897
        • Halpern V.
        • Lopez L.M.
        • Grimes D.A.
        • Gallo M.F.
        Strategies to improve adherence and acceptability of hormonal methods of contraception.
        Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011; 4: CD004317
        • Backman T.
        • Huhtala S.
        • Luoto R.
        • Tuominen J.
        • Rauramo I.
        • Koskenvuo M.
        Advance information improves user satisfaction with the levonorgestrel intrauterine system.
        Obstet Gynecol. 2002; 99: 608-613
        • Garbers S.
        • Meserve A.
        • Kottke M.
        • Hatcher R.
        • Chiasson M.A.
        Tailored health messaging improves contraceptive continuation and adherence: results from a randomized controlled trial.
        Contraception. 2012; 86: 536-542