Racial/Ethnic and Socioeconomic Disparities of Contraceptive Preference-Use Match in the United States.

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Jusung Lee, Krista J Howard, Amanda M Ryan, Ria Jain, Hafsa B Imran, Jeffrey T Howard
{"title":"Racial/Ethnic and Socioeconomic Disparities of Contraceptive Preference-Use Match in the United States.","authors":"Jusung Lee, Krista J Howard, Amanda M Ryan, Ria Jain, Hafsa B Imran, Jeffrey T Howard","doi":"10.1007/s40615-025-02667-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To examine factors associated with a contraceptive preference-use match, defined as alignment between an individual's stated contraceptive preference and actual use, in the USA, with a focus on disparities across demographic and socioeconomic groups.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The population-based study used the 2022 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS). The key outcome was a match between contraceptive preference and actual use. Independent variables included demographic, socioeconomic, and health-related characteristics. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to investigate significant factors associated with contraceptive matches.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of a total of 12,154 participants, the most preferred contraceptive method was short-acting reversible contraception (SAC) (29.5%), followed by long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) (25.0%), permanent (19.1%), and other/barrier methods (17.4%). Approximately 81.0% of participants were contraceptive users, and the overall contraceptive preference-use match was 45.8%. LARC showed the highest match rate (49.0%), followed by other/barriers (46.7%), SAC (38.3%), and permanent methods (33.7%). While Black individuals had a higher match rate with permanent methods (OR 1.83), they had a lower match rate with LARC (OR 0.65) and SAC (OR 0.42). In contrast, participants aged 40-44 years had 1.61 times greater odds of LARC matches. Individuals with higher education levels also showed a greater match than those with less than a high school diploma.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Findings highlight that racial/ethnic minorities and individuals with low socioeconomic status (SES) experience a lower preference-use match of LARC and SAC, while individuals with low SES show greater matches for other/barrier methods. Addressing these disparities may enhance reproductive autonomy and equitable access to contraceptives.</p>","PeriodicalId":16921,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40615-025-02667-4","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To examine factors associated with a contraceptive preference-use match, defined as alignment between an individual's stated contraceptive preference and actual use, in the USA, with a focus on disparities across demographic and socioeconomic groups.

Methods: The population-based study used the 2022 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS). The key outcome was a match between contraceptive preference and actual use. Independent variables included demographic, socioeconomic, and health-related characteristics. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to investigate significant factors associated with contraceptive matches.

Results: Of a total of 12,154 participants, the most preferred contraceptive method was short-acting reversible contraception (SAC) (29.5%), followed by long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) (25.0%), permanent (19.1%), and other/barrier methods (17.4%). Approximately 81.0% of participants were contraceptive users, and the overall contraceptive preference-use match was 45.8%. LARC showed the highest match rate (49.0%), followed by other/barriers (46.7%), SAC (38.3%), and permanent methods (33.7%). While Black individuals had a higher match rate with permanent methods (OR 1.83), they had a lower match rate with LARC (OR 0.65) and SAC (OR 0.42). In contrast, participants aged 40-44 years had 1.61 times greater odds of LARC matches. Individuals with higher education levels also showed a greater match than those with less than a high school diploma.

Conclusions: Findings highlight that racial/ethnic minorities and individuals with low socioeconomic status (SES) experience a lower preference-use match of LARC and SAC, while individuals with low SES show greater matches for other/barrier methods. Addressing these disparities may enhance reproductive autonomy and equitable access to contraceptives.

美国避孕偏好-使用匹配的种族/民族和社会经济差异。
目的:研究与避孕偏好-使用匹配相关的因素,定义为个人陈述的避孕偏好与实际使用之间的一致性,在美国,重点关注人口和社会经济群体之间的差异。方法:采用2022年行为危险因素监测系统(BRFSS)进行基于人群的研究。关键的结果是避孕偏好和实际使用之间的匹配。独立变量包括人口统计学、社会经济和健康相关特征。采用多变量logistic回归研究与避孕匹配相关的重要因素。结果:在12154名参与者中,最受欢迎的避孕方法是短效可逆避孕(SAC)(29.5%),其次是长效可逆避孕(LARC)(25.0%)、永久性避孕(19.1%)和其他/屏障避孕(17.4%)。约81.0%的参与者是避孕药具使用者,总体避孕药具偏好-使用匹配度为45.8%。LARC匹配率最高(49.0%),其次为其他障碍(46.7%)、SAC(38.3%)和永久方法(33.7%)。黑人个体与永久方法的匹配率较高(OR为1.83),与LARC和SAC的匹配率较低(OR为0.65)。相比之下,40-44岁的参与者的LARC匹配几率高出1.61倍。受教育程度较高的人也比高中以下学历的人表现出更高的匹配度。结论:研究结果表明,少数民族和低社会经济地位个体对LARC和SAC的偏好使用匹配度较低,而低社会经济地位个体对其他/障碍方法的偏好使用匹配度较高。解决这些差异可以增强生殖自主和公平获得避孕药具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities
Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
5.10%
发文量
263
期刊介绍: Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities reports on the scholarly progress of work to understand, address, and ultimately eliminate health disparities based on race and ethnicity. Efforts to explore underlying causes of health disparities and to describe interventions that have been undertaken to address racial and ethnic health disparities are featured. Promising studies that are ongoing or studies that have longer term data are welcome, as are studies that serve as lessons for best practices in eliminating health disparities. Original research, systematic reviews, and commentaries presenting the state-of-the-art thinking on problems centered on health disparities will be considered for publication. We particularly encourage review articles that generate innovative and testable ideas, and constructive discussions and/or critiques of health disparities.Because the Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities receives a large number of submissions, about 30% of submissions to the Journal are sent out for full peer review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信