Madeline Thornton , Brooke W. Bullington , Kristen A. Berg , Kari White , Suzanna Larkin , Margaret Boozer , Tania Serna , Emily S. Miller , Jennifer L. Bailit , Kavita S. Arora
{"title":"希望永久避孕的产后患者考虑长效可逆避孕的患者和妇产科观点","authors":"Madeline Thornton , Brooke W. Bullington , Kristen A. Berg , Kari White , Suzanna Larkin , Margaret Boozer , Tania Serna , Emily S. Miller , Jennifer L. Bailit , Kavita S. Arora","doi":"10.1016/j.contraception.2024.110781","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective(s)</h3><div>We sought to understand patients’ and obstetrician-gynecologists’ priorities in seeking or recommending long-acting reversible contraceptive methods (LARC; intrauterine devices and contraceptive implants) versus permanent contraception in the postpartum period when permanent contraception was the patient’s initial contraceptive preference.</div></div><div><h3>Study design</h3><div>We interviewed 81 postpartum patients who desired permanent contraception and their delivering obstetrician-gynecologist (<em>n</em> = 67) from four US institutions to explore patient and obstetrician-gynecologist (OBGYN) perspectives navigating permanent contraception counseling and decision-making. We used thematic content analysis to analyze interview transcripts using NVivo 12 Pro software.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Our analysis revealed a mismatch between patient and OBGYN priorities when considering permanent contraception versus LARC. Many OBGYNs in our study described a preference for LARC methods over permanent contraception and often prioritized factors such as reversibility and menstrual suppression. However, many patients sought permanent contraception for reasons that were not adequately addressed by LARC methods such as method permanence, desire to avoid menstrual suppression, cancer prevention, prior negative experiences with LARC, and a preference to avoid a foreign body.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion(s)</h3><div>These results suggest that priorities in selecting a preferred contraceptive method may sometimes not be aligned between patients and clinicians and that LARC methods may not always be an acceptable alternative for patients who desire permanent contraception. The findings from this study highlight the importance of eliciting and centering a patient’s goals and desires for pursuing permanent contraception during contraceptive counseling. Clinicians should be aware of the various perspectives and values patients have on these methods and include them in patient-centered share decision-making.</div></div><div><h3>Implications</h3><div>Our study revealed a large discrepancy between patient and obstetrician-gynecologist priorities in seeking or recommending permanent contraception. Clinicians must avoid making assumptions about a patient’s priorities for a contraceptive choice to engage in truly patient-driven contraceptive counseling.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":10762,"journal":{"name":"Contraception","volume":"143 ","pages":"Article 110781"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Patient and obstetrician-gynecologist perspectives on considering long-acting reversible contraception for postpartum patients who desire permanent contraception\",\"authors\":\"Madeline Thornton , Brooke W. Bullington , Kristen A. Berg , Kari White , Suzanna Larkin , Margaret Boozer , Tania Serna , Emily S. Miller , Jennifer L. Bailit , Kavita S. Arora\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.contraception.2024.110781\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objective(s)</h3><div>We sought to understand patients’ and obstetrician-gynecologists’ priorities in seeking or recommending long-acting reversible contraceptive methods (LARC; intrauterine devices and contraceptive implants) versus permanent contraception in the postpartum period when permanent contraception was the patient’s initial contraceptive preference.</div></div><div><h3>Study design</h3><div>We interviewed 81 postpartum patients who desired permanent contraception and their delivering obstetrician-gynecologist (<em>n</em> = 67) from four US institutions to explore patient and obstetrician-gynecologist (OBGYN) perspectives navigating permanent contraception counseling and decision-making. We used thematic content analysis to analyze interview transcripts using NVivo 12 Pro software.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Our analysis revealed a mismatch between patient and OBGYN priorities when considering permanent contraception versus LARC. Many OBGYNs in our study described a preference for LARC methods over permanent contraception and often prioritized factors such as reversibility and menstrual suppression. However, many patients sought permanent contraception for reasons that were not adequately addressed by LARC methods such as method permanence, desire to avoid menstrual suppression, cancer prevention, prior negative experiences with LARC, and a preference to avoid a foreign body.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion(s)</h3><div>These results suggest that priorities in selecting a preferred contraceptive method may sometimes not be aligned between patients and clinicians and that LARC methods may not always be an acceptable alternative for patients who desire permanent contraception. The findings from this study highlight the importance of eliciting and centering a patient’s goals and desires for pursuing permanent contraception during contraceptive counseling. Clinicians should be aware of the various perspectives and values patients have on these methods and include them in patient-centered share decision-making.</div></div><div><h3>Implications</h3><div>Our study revealed a large discrepancy between patient and obstetrician-gynecologist priorities in seeking or recommending permanent contraception. Clinicians must avoid making assumptions about a patient’s priorities for a contraceptive choice to engage in truly patient-driven contraceptive counseling.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10762,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Contraception\",\"volume\":\"143 \",\"pages\":\"Article 110781\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Contraception\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010782424004955\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contraception","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010782424004955","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Patient and obstetrician-gynecologist perspectives on considering long-acting reversible contraception for postpartum patients who desire permanent contraception
Objective(s)
We sought to understand patients’ and obstetrician-gynecologists’ priorities in seeking or recommending long-acting reversible contraceptive methods (LARC; intrauterine devices and contraceptive implants) versus permanent contraception in the postpartum period when permanent contraception was the patient’s initial contraceptive preference.
Study design
We interviewed 81 postpartum patients who desired permanent contraception and their delivering obstetrician-gynecologist (n = 67) from four US institutions to explore patient and obstetrician-gynecologist (OBGYN) perspectives navigating permanent contraception counseling and decision-making. We used thematic content analysis to analyze interview transcripts using NVivo 12 Pro software.
Results
Our analysis revealed a mismatch between patient and OBGYN priorities when considering permanent contraception versus LARC. Many OBGYNs in our study described a preference for LARC methods over permanent contraception and often prioritized factors such as reversibility and menstrual suppression. However, many patients sought permanent contraception for reasons that were not adequately addressed by LARC methods such as method permanence, desire to avoid menstrual suppression, cancer prevention, prior negative experiences with LARC, and a preference to avoid a foreign body.
Conclusion(s)
These results suggest that priorities in selecting a preferred contraceptive method may sometimes not be aligned between patients and clinicians and that LARC methods may not always be an acceptable alternative for patients who desire permanent contraception. The findings from this study highlight the importance of eliciting and centering a patient’s goals and desires for pursuing permanent contraception during contraceptive counseling. Clinicians should be aware of the various perspectives and values patients have on these methods and include them in patient-centered share decision-making.
Implications
Our study revealed a large discrepancy between patient and obstetrician-gynecologist priorities in seeking or recommending permanent contraception. Clinicians must avoid making assumptions about a patient’s priorities for a contraceptive choice to engage in truly patient-driven contraceptive counseling.
期刊介绍:
Contraception has an open access mirror journal Contraception: X, sharing the same aims and scope, editorial team, submission system and rigorous peer review.
The journal Contraception wishes to advance reproductive health through the rapid publication of the best and most interesting new scholarship regarding contraception and related fields such as abortion. The journal welcomes manuscripts from investigators working in the laboratory, clinical and social sciences, as well as public health and health professions education.