Contraceptive use and pregnancy planning in Britain during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic: findings from a large, quasi-representative survey (Natsal-COVID).


Journal

BMJ sexual & reproductive health
ISSN: 2515-2009
Titre abrégé: BMJ Sex Reprod Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101715577

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
10 2023
Historique:
received: 28 11 2022
accepted: 12 03 2023
medline: 23 10 2023
pubmed: 24 3 2023
entrez: 23 3 2023
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Contraceptive services were significantly disrupted during the COVID-19 pandemic in Britain. We investigated contraception-related health inequalities in the first year of the pandemic. Natsal-COVID Wave 2 surveyed 6658 adults aged 18-59 years between March and April 2021, using quotas and weighting to achieve quasi-representativeness. Our analysis included sexually active participants aged 18-44 years, described as female at birth. We analysed contraception use, contraceptive switching due to the pandemic, contraceptive service access, and pregnancy plannedness. Of 1488 participants, 1619 were at risk of unplanned pregnancy, of whom 54.1% (51.0%-57.1%) reported routinely using effective contraception in the past year. Among all participants, 14.3% (12.5%-16.3%) reported switching or stopping contraception due to the pandemic. 3.2% (2.0%-5.1%) of those using effective methods pre-pandemic switched to less effective methods, while 3.8% (2.5%-5.9%) stopped. 29.3% (26.9%-31.8%) of at-risk participants reported seeking contraceptive services, of whom 16.4% (13.0%-20.4%) reported difficulty accessing services. Clinic closures and cancelled appointments were commonly reported pandemic-related reasons for difficulty accessing services. This unmet need was associated with younger age, diverse sexual identities and anxiety symptoms. Of 199 pregnancies, 6.6% (3.9%-11.1%) scored as 'unplanned'; less planning was associated with younger age, lower social grade and unemployment. Just under a third of participants sought contraceptive services during the pandemic and most were successful, indicating resilience and adaptability of service delivery. However, one in six reported an unmet need due to the pandemic. COVID-induced inequalities in service access potentially exacerbated existing reproductive health inequalities. These should be addressed in the post-pandemic period and beyond.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Contraceptive services were significantly disrupted during the COVID-19 pandemic in Britain. We investigated contraception-related health inequalities in the first year of the pandemic.
METHODS
Natsal-COVID Wave 2 surveyed 6658 adults aged 18-59 years between March and April 2021, using quotas and weighting to achieve quasi-representativeness. Our analysis included sexually active participants aged 18-44 years, described as female at birth. We analysed contraception use, contraceptive switching due to the pandemic, contraceptive service access, and pregnancy plannedness.
RESULTS
Of 1488 participants, 1619 were at risk of unplanned pregnancy, of whom 54.1% (51.0%-57.1%) reported routinely using effective contraception in the past year. Among all participants, 14.3% (12.5%-16.3%) reported switching or stopping contraception due to the pandemic. 3.2% (2.0%-5.1%) of those using effective methods pre-pandemic switched to less effective methods, while 3.8% (2.5%-5.9%) stopped. 29.3% (26.9%-31.8%) of at-risk participants reported seeking contraceptive services, of whom 16.4% (13.0%-20.4%) reported difficulty accessing services. Clinic closures and cancelled appointments were commonly reported pandemic-related reasons for difficulty accessing services. This unmet need was associated with younger age, diverse sexual identities and anxiety symptoms. Of 199 pregnancies, 6.6% (3.9%-11.1%) scored as 'unplanned'; less planning was associated with younger age, lower social grade and unemployment.
CONCLUSIONS
Just under a third of participants sought contraceptive services during the pandemic and most were successful, indicating resilience and adaptability of service delivery. However, one in six reported an unmet need due to the pandemic. COVID-induced inequalities in service access potentially exacerbated existing reproductive health inequalities. These should be addressed in the post-pandemic period and beyond.

Identifiants

pubmed: 36958823
pii: bmjsrh-2022-201763
doi: 10.1136/bmjsrh-2022-201763
pmc: PMC10579517
doi:

Substances chimiques

Contraceptive Agents 0

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

260-273

Informations de copyright

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Competing interests: None declared.

Références

Womens Health Rep (New Rochelle). 2021 Mar 23;2(1):71-77
pubmed: 33786533
Healthcare (Basel). 2023 Jan 07;11(2):
pubmed: 36673553
J Epidemiol Community Health. 2020 Sep;74(9):765
pubmed: 32586985
Contracept Reprod Med. 2022 Mar 14;7(1):3
pubmed: 35287763
BMJ Sex Reprod Health. 2020 Jul;46(3):200-209
pubmed: 31964778
Wellcome Open Res. 2021 Aug 16;6:209
pubmed: 35495088
Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2017 Mar;49(1):7-16
pubmed: 28245088
Lancet Public Health. 2022 Jan;7(1):e36-e47
pubmed: 34995541
Hum Reprod. 2022 Nov 24;37(12):2921-2931
pubmed: 36228661
Sex Transm Infect. 2022 Nov;98(7):469-477
pubmed: 34916335
Contraception. 2021 Jun;103(6):380-385
pubmed: 33587906
Wellcome Open Res. 2022 Jun 1;7:166
pubmed: 37794900
Sex Reprod Healthc. 2022 Sep;33:100754
pubmed: 35842979
BMJ Sex Reprod Health. 2023 Jan;49(1):12-20
pubmed: 35444001
Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2016 Mar-Apr;39:24-31
pubmed: 26719105
Fam Med Community Health. 2021 Aug;9(3):
pubmed: 34344766
Lancet. 2013 Nov 30;382(9907):1807-16
pubmed: 24286786
Contraception. 2011 May;83(5):397-404
pubmed: 21477680
Contraception. 2006 Sep;74(3):224-33
pubmed: 16904416
BMJ Sex Reprod Health. 2021 Oct;47(4):269-276
pubmed: 33707178
BMJ Sex Reprod Health. 2021 Oct;47(4):235-237
pubmed: 33879530
BMJ Sex Reprod Health. 2022 Jan;48(1):60-65
pubmed: 34675063
Eur J Public Health. 2022 Jun 1;32(3):339-340
pubmed: 35512397
Sex Transm Infect. 2020 Nov;96(7):473-474
pubmed: 33077611
Public Health. 2014 Dec;128(12):1118-20
pubmed: 25458115
Sex Transm Infect. 2021 Aug;97(5):357-362
pubmed: 33203737
Med Care. 2003 Nov;41(11):1284-92
pubmed: 14583691
Lancet Digit Health. 2021 Feb;3(2):e76-e77
pubmed: 33509387
Patient Relat Outcome Meas. 2017 Apr 06;8:43-56
pubmed: 28435343
Sex Transm Infect. 2021 Mar;97(2):88-92
pubmed: 33082232
BMJ Sex Reprod Health. 2020 Oct;46(4):241-243
pubmed: 32788180

Auteurs

Andrew J Baxter (AJ)

MRC/CSO Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, School of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK Andy.Baxter@glasgow.ac.uk.

Rebecca S Geary (RS)

Institute of Population Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.

Emily Dema (E)

Institute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK.

Raquel Bosó Pérez (R)

MRC/CSO Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, School of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.

Julie Riddell (J)

MRC/CSO Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, School of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.

Malachi Willis (M)

MRC/CSO Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, School of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.

Anne Conolly (A)

Institute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK.
NatCen Social Research, London, UK.

Laura L Oakley (LL)

Centre for Fertility and Health, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.
London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.

Andrew J Copas (AJ)

Institute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK.

Jo Gibbs (J)

Institute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK.

Christopher Bonell (C)

London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.

Pam Sonnenberg (P)

Institute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK.

Catherine H Mercer (CH)

Institute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK.

Soazig Clifton (S)

Institute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK.
NatCen Social Research, London, UK.

Nigel Field (N)

Institute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK.

Kirsten Mitchell (K)

MRC/CSO Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, School of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH