Social Network Influences on Young Women's Choice to Use Long-Acting Reversible Contraception: A Systematic Review.
contraception
decision-making
female
intrauterine devices
long-acting reversible contraception
Journal
Journal of midwifery & women's health
ISSN: 1542-2011
Titre abrégé: J Midwifery Womens Health
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 100909407
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Nov 2021
Nov 2021
Historique:
revised:
09
07
2021
received:
26
10
2020
accepted:
12
07
2021
pubmed:
8
9
2021
medline:
24
12
2021
entrez:
7
9
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Long-acting reversible contraception (LARC; including intrauterine devices and implants) is recommended as the first-line contraceptive choice by several professional organizations (eg, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists); however, rates of uptake are lower than those of other contraceptive methods. A young woman's social network may influence the decision to use LARC. The purpose of this review was to determine the role of health care providers (HCPs), family, peers, and sexual partner(s) on young women's decisions to initiate LARC. Several databases (PubMed, CINAHL, and PsycINFO) were searched for articles published between 2000 and 2020 that studied the social network influences of HCPs, family, peers, and sexual partner(s) on LARC initiation among women in the United States aged 18 to 25. A narrative synthesis of the included articles was conducted. Twenty-nine articles met the inclusion criteria (21 qualitative, 6 quantitative, 2 mixed methods). HCPs are an important influence on a young woman's LARC decision-making. Peers and family also have a role but were often sources of negative or inaccurate information. Gaps in the literature were identified, including a lack of data on implant users and a dearth of studies on the role of sexual partner influence; most studies were not guided by theory. HCPs are integral to LARC initiation and may be more influential than other social network members. Future research should focus on understanding how social network members interact to result in LARC initiation. Gaining insight into these influences may improve existing interventions or contribute to the development of new interventions and ultimately promote LARC use among young women.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
758-771Informations de copyright
© 2021 by the American College of Nurse-Midwives.
Références
Troutman M, Rafique S, Plowden TC. Are higher unintended pregnancy rates among minorities a result of disparate access to contraception? Contracept Reprod Med. 2020;5:16.
Sedgh G, Singh S, Hussain R. Intended and unintended pregnancies worldwide in 2012 and recent trends. Stud Fam Plann. 2014;45(3):301-314.
Finer LB, Lindberg LD, Desai S. A prospective measure of unintended pregnancy in the United States. Contraception. 2018;98(6):522-527.
Raidoo S, Kaneshiro B. Contraception counseling for adolescents. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2017;29(5):310-315.
Cruz-Bendezú AM, Lovell GV, Roche B, et al. Psychosocial status and prenatal care of unintended pregnancies among low-income women. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2020;20(1):615.
Su JH. Unintended birth and children's long-term mental health. J Health Soc Behav. 2017;58(3):357-370.
Kavanaugh ML, Kost K, Frohwirth L, Maddow-Zimet I, Gor V. Parents’ experience of unintended childbearing: a qualitative study of factors that mitigate or exacerbate effects. Soc Sci Med. 2017;174:133-141.
Finer LB, Zolna MR. Declines in unintended pregnancy in the United States, 2008-2011. N Engl J Med. 2016;374(9):843-852.
Family Planning. Goal: Improve pregnancy planning and prevent unintended pregnancy. Healthy People 2030 website. Published 2020. Accessed June 23, 2021.https://health.gov/healthypeople/objectives-and-data/browse-objectives/family-planning
Reproductive Justice. National Women's Law Center website. Published 2020. Accessed May 22, 2020. https://nwlc.org/issue/reproductive-justice/
Trussell J. Contraceptive failure in the United States. Contraception. 2011;83(5):397-404.
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. ACOG committee opinion no. 735: Adolescents and long-acting reversible contraception: implants and intrauterine devices. Obstet Gynecol. 2018;131(5):e130-e139.
American Academy of Pediatricians Committee on Adolescence. Contraception for adolescents. Pediatrics. 2014;134(4):e1244-e1256.
Hardeman J, Weiss BD. Intrauterine devices: an update. Am Fam Physician. 2014;89(6):445-450.
Daniels K, Daugherty J, Jones J. Current contraceptive status among women aged 15-44: United States, 2011-2013. NCHS Data Brief. 2014;(173):1-8.
Wright K. Social networks, interpersonal social support, and health outcomes: a health communication perspective. Front Commun. 2016;1:10. doi: 10.3389/fcomm.2016.00010
Blackstock OJ, Mba-Jonas A, Sacajiu GM. Family planning knowledge: the role of social networks and primary care providers as information sources for African American women. Am J Sex Educ. 2010;5(2):128-143.
Gayen K, Raeside R. Social networks and contraception practice of women in rural Bangladesh. Soc Sci Med. 2010;71(9):1584-1592.
Levy K, Minnis AM, Lahiff M, Schmittdiel J, Dehlendorf C. Bringing patients’ social context into the examination room: an investigation of the discussion of social influence during contraceptive counseling. Womens Health Issues. 2015;25(1):13-21.
Valente TW, Watkins SC, Jato MN, van der Straten A, Tsitsol LP. Social network associations with contraceptive use among Cameroonian women in voluntary associations. Soc Sci Med. 1997;45(5):677-687.
Yee L, Simon M. The role of the social network in contraceptive decision-making among young, African American and Latina women. J Adolesc Health. 2010;47(4):374-380.
Jones RK, Biddlecom AE, Hebert L, Mellor R. Teens reflect on their sources of contraceptive information. J Adoles Res. 2011;26(4):423-446.
Melo J, Peters M, Teal S, Guiahi M. Adolescent and young women's contraceptive decision-making processes: choosing “the best method for her.” J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2015;28(4):224-228.
Pritt NM, Norris AH, Berlan ED. Barriers and facilitators to adolescents’ use of long-acting reversible contraceptives. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2017;30(1):18-22.
Picardo CM, Nichols M, Edelman A, Jensen JT. Women's knowledge and sources of information on the risks and benefits of oral contraception. J Am Med Womens Assoc (1972). 2003;58(2):112-116.
Carter MW, Bergdall AR, Henry-Moss D, Hatfield-Timajchy K, Hock-Long L. A qualitative study of contraceptive understanding among young adults. Contraception. 2012;86(5):543-550.
Dehlendorf C, Grumbach K, Schmittdiel JA, Steinauer J. Shared decision making in contraceptive counseling. Contraception. 2017;95(5):452-455.
Sarfraz M, Hamid S, Rawstorne P, Ali M, Jayasuriya R. Role of social network in decision making for increasing uptake and continuing use of long acting reversible (LARC) methods in Pakistan. Reprod Health. 2021;18(1):96.
Brown BP, Chor J, Hebert LE, Webb ME, Whitaker AK. Shared negative experiences of long-acting reversible contraception and their influence on contraceptive decision-making: a multi-methods study. Contraception. 2019;99(4):228-232.
Cohen R, Sheeder J, Kane M, Teal SB. Factors associated with contraceptive method choice and initiation in adolescents and young women. J Adolesc Health. 2017;61(4):454-460.
Thiery M. Intrauterine contraception: from silver ring to intrauterine contraceptive implant. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2000;90(2):145-152.
Boonstra H, Duran V, Northington Gamble V, Blumenthal P, Dominguez L, Pies C. The “boom and bust phenomenon”: the hopes, dreams, and broken promises of the contraceptive revolution. Contraception. 2000;61(1):9-25.
Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG; PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009;6(7):e1000097.
Hubacher D. The checkered history and bright future of intrauterine contraception in the United States. Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2002;34(2):98-103.
Sirriyeh R, Lawton R, Gardner P, Armitage G. Reviewing studies with diverse designs: the development and evaluation of a new tool. J Eval Clin Pract. 2012;18(4):746-752.
Bessett D, Prager J, Havard J, Murphy DJ, Agénor M, Foster AM. Barriers to contraceptive access after health care reform: experiences of young adults in Massachusetts. Womens Health Issues. 2015;25(2):91-96.
Biggs MA, Kimport K, Mays A, Kaller S, Berglas NF. Young women's perspectives about the contraceptive counseling received during their emergency contraception visit. Womens Health Issues. 2019;29(2):170-175.
Brown MK, Auerswald C, Eyre SL, Deardorff J, Dehlendorf C. Identifying counseling needs of nulliparous adolescent intrauterine contraceptive users: a qualitative approach. J Adolesc Health. 2013;52(3):293-300.
Brown JL, Haddad LB, Gause NK, et al. Examining the contraceptive decisions of young, HIV-infected women: a qualitative study. Women Health. 2019;59(3):305-317.
Downey MM, Arteaga S, Villaseñor E, Gomez AM. More than a destination: contraceptive decision making as a journey. Womens Health Issues. 2017;27(5):539-545.
Gomez AM, Freihart B. Motivations for interest, disinterest and uncertainty in intrauterine device use among young women. Matern Child Health J. 2017;21(9):1753-1762.
Gomez AM, Wapman M. Under (implicit) pressure: young Black and Latina women's perceptions of contraceptive care. Contraception. 2017;96(4):221-226.
Hanson JD, McMahon TR, Griese ER, Kenyon DB. Understanding gender roles in teen pregnancy prevention among American Indian youth. Am J Health Behav. 2014;38(6):807-815.
Higgins JA. Pregnancy ambivalence and long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARC) use among young adult women: a qualitative study. Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2017;49(3):149-156.
Higgins JA, Kramer RD, Ryder KM. Provider bias in long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) promotion and removal: perceptions of young adults. Am J Public Health. 2016;106(11):1932-1937.
Higgins JA, Ryder K, Skarda G, Koepsel E, Bennett EA. The sexual acceptability of intrauterine contraception: a qualitative study of young adult women. Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2015;47(3):115-122.
Kaller S, Mays A, Freedman L, Harper CC, Biggs MA. Exploring young women's reasons for adopting intrauterine or oral emergency contraception in the United States: a qualitative study. BMC Womens Health. 2020;20(1):15.
Kavanaugh ML, Frohwirth L, Jerman J, Popkin R, Ethier K. Long-acting reversible contraception for adolescents and young adults: patient and provider perspectives. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2013;26(2):86-95.
Mann ES, White AL, Beavin C, Dys G. Foreign objects in college bodies: young women's feelings about long-acting reversible contraception (LARC). Women Health. 2020;60(6):719-733.
Murphy MK, Burke PJ, Haider S. A qualitative application of diffusion of innovations to adolescents’ perceptions of long-acting reversible contraception's attributes. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2017;30(4):484-490.
Payne JB, Sundstrom B, DeMaria AL. A qualitative study of young women's beliefs about intrauterine devices: fear of infertility. J Midwifery Womens Health. 2016;61(4):482-488.
Rubin SE, Felsher M, Korich F, Jacobs AM. Urban adolescents’ and young adults’ decision-making process around selection of intrauterine contraception. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2016;29(3):234-239.
Sundstrom B, Baker-Whitcomb A, DeMaria AL. A qualitative analysis of long-acting reversible contraception. Mater Child Health J. 2015;19(7):1507-1514.
Anderson N, Steinauer J, Valente T, Koblentz J, Dehlendorf C. Women's social communication about IUDs: a qualitative analysis. Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2014;46(3):141-148.
Baugh E, Davis C. The influence of perceived parenting style and contraceptive self-efficacy on college student contraceptive use. Marriage Fam Rev. 2016;52(8):764-780.
Fleming KL, Sokoloff A, Raine TR. Attitudes and beliefs about the intrauterine device among teenagers and young women. Contraception. 2010;82(2):178-182.
Gomez AM, Hartofelis EC, Finlayson S, Clark JB. Do knowledge and attitudes regarding intrauterine devices predict interest in their use? Womens Health Issues. 2015;25(4):359-365.
Hoopes AJ, Teal SB, Akers AY, Sheeder J. Low acceptability of certain contraceptive methods among young women. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2018;31(3):274-280.
Smith AJB, Harney KF, Singh T, Hurwitz AG. Provider and health system factors associated with usage of long-acting reversible contraception in adolescents. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2017;30(6):609-614.
Dasari M, Borrero S, Akers AY, et al. Barriers to long-acting reversible contraceptive uptake among homeless young women. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2016;29(2):104-110.
Brown MK, Auerswald C, Eyre SL, Deardorff J, Dehlendorf C. Identifying counseling needs of nulliparous adolescent intrauterine contraceptive users: a qualitative approach. J Adolesc Health. 2013;52(3):293-300.
Glanz K, Rimer BK, Viswanath K, eds. Health Behavior and Health Education: Theory, Research, and Practice. 5th ed. Jossey-Bass; 2015.
Society for Adolescent Health and Medicine. Advocating for adolescent and young adult male sexual and reproductive health: a position statement from the Society for Adolescent Health and Medicine. J Adolesc Health. 2018;63(5):657-661.
Kavanaugh ML, Jerman J, Finer LB. Changes in use of long-acting reversible contraceptive methods among U.S. women, 2009-2012. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;126(5):917-927.
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Committee opinion no. 615: Access to contraception. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;125(1):250-255.
Barber JS, Ela E, Gatny H, et al. Contraceptive desert? Black-white differences in characteristics of nearby pharmacies. J Racial Ethn Health Disparities. 2019;6(4):719-732.
Artinian NT. Telehealth as a tool for enhancing care for patients with cardiovascular disease. J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2007;22(1):25-31.
Campbell-Grossman CK, Hudson DB, Keating-Lefler R, Heusinkvelt S. New Mothers Network: the provision of social support to single, low-income, African American mothers via e-mail messages. J Fam Nurs. 2009;15(2):220-236.
Harrison R, Jones B, Gardner P, Lawton R. Quality assessment with diverse studies (QuADS): an appraisal tool for methodological and reporting quality in systematic reviews of mixed- or multi-method studies. BMC Health Serv Res. 2021;21(1):144.