Cargando…
Specialist follow-up contraceptive support after abortion—Impact on effective contraceptive use at six months and subsequent abortions: A randomised controlled trial
OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact of specialist contraceptive support after abortion on effective contraceptive use at six months and subsequent abortions within two years. METHODS: Multicentre randomised controlled trial among women undergoing induced abortion in three London boroughs. Allocation wa...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6559659/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31185058 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0217902 |
_version_ | 1783425839490138112 |
---|---|
author | Kumar, Usha Pollard, Louise Campbell, Lucy Yurdakul, Selin Calvete, Clara Cantalapiedra Coker, Bola Chen, Tao Douiri, Abdel |
author_facet | Kumar, Usha Pollard, Louise Campbell, Lucy Yurdakul, Selin Calvete, Clara Cantalapiedra Coker, Bola Chen, Tao Douiri, Abdel |
author_sort | Kumar, Usha |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact of specialist contraceptive support after abortion on effective contraceptive use at six months and subsequent abortions within two years. METHODS: Multicentre randomised controlled trial among women undergoing induced abortion in three London boroughs. Allocation was through electronically concealed stratified randomisation by centre, blinding clinicians and participants to arm allocation until interventions. Control group received standard care, comprising advice to follow up with their general practitioner or contraceptive clinic as needed. Intervention group additionally received specialist contraceptive support via telephone or face-to-face consultation at 2–4 weeks and 3 months post-abortion. Primary outcome was rate of effective contraceptive use at six months post-abortion. Secondary outcomes were subsequent abortions within two years. RESULTS: 569 women were recruited between October 2011 and February 2013, randomised to intervention (282) and control (287) groups; 290 (142 intervention, 148 control) were available for primary outcome analysis. Intention-to-treat analysis showed no significant difference between the two groups in effective contraceptive use after abortion (62%, vs 54%, p = 0·172), long-acting contraceptive use (42% versus 32%, p = 0·084), and subsequent abortion (similar rates, at 1 year: 10%, p = 0·895, between 1–2 years: 6%, p = 0·944). Per-protocol analysis showed those who received the complete intervention package were significantly more likely to use effective contraception (67% versus 54%, p = 0·048), in particular long-acting contraception (49% versus 32%, p = 0·010) and showed a non-significant reduction in subsequent abortions within 2 years (at 1 year: 5% versus 10%, p = 0·098; and between 1–2 years: 3% versus 6%, p = 0·164, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Structured specialist support post-abortion did not result in significant use of effective contraception at six months or reduction in subsequent abortions within two years. Participants engaging with the intervention showed positive effect on effective contraception at six months post-abortion. The potential benefit of such intervention may become evident through further studies with increased patient participation. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6559659 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-65596592019-06-17 Specialist follow-up contraceptive support after abortion—Impact on effective contraceptive use at six months and subsequent abortions: A randomised controlled trial Kumar, Usha Pollard, Louise Campbell, Lucy Yurdakul, Selin Calvete, Clara Cantalapiedra Coker, Bola Chen, Tao Douiri, Abdel PLoS One Research Article OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact of specialist contraceptive support after abortion on effective contraceptive use at six months and subsequent abortions within two years. METHODS: Multicentre randomised controlled trial among women undergoing induced abortion in three London boroughs. Allocation was through electronically concealed stratified randomisation by centre, blinding clinicians and participants to arm allocation until interventions. Control group received standard care, comprising advice to follow up with their general practitioner or contraceptive clinic as needed. Intervention group additionally received specialist contraceptive support via telephone or face-to-face consultation at 2–4 weeks and 3 months post-abortion. Primary outcome was rate of effective contraceptive use at six months post-abortion. Secondary outcomes were subsequent abortions within two years. RESULTS: 569 women were recruited between October 2011 and February 2013, randomised to intervention (282) and control (287) groups; 290 (142 intervention, 148 control) were available for primary outcome analysis. Intention-to-treat analysis showed no significant difference between the two groups in effective contraceptive use after abortion (62%, vs 54%, p = 0·172), long-acting contraceptive use (42% versus 32%, p = 0·084), and subsequent abortion (similar rates, at 1 year: 10%, p = 0·895, between 1–2 years: 6%, p = 0·944). Per-protocol analysis showed those who received the complete intervention package were significantly more likely to use effective contraception (67% versus 54%, p = 0·048), in particular long-acting contraception (49% versus 32%, p = 0·010) and showed a non-significant reduction in subsequent abortions within 2 years (at 1 year: 5% versus 10%, p = 0·098; and between 1–2 years: 3% versus 6%, p = 0·164, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Structured specialist support post-abortion did not result in significant use of effective contraception at six months or reduction in subsequent abortions within two years. Participants engaging with the intervention showed positive effect on effective contraception at six months post-abortion. The potential benefit of such intervention may become evident through further studies with increased patient participation. Public Library of Science 2019-06-11 /pmc/articles/PMC6559659/ /pubmed/31185058 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0217902 Text en © 2019 Kumar et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Kumar, Usha Pollard, Louise Campbell, Lucy Yurdakul, Selin Calvete, Clara Cantalapiedra Coker, Bola Chen, Tao Douiri, Abdel Specialist follow-up contraceptive support after abortion—Impact on effective contraceptive use at six months and subsequent abortions: A randomised controlled trial |
title | Specialist follow-up contraceptive support after abortion—Impact on effective contraceptive use at six months and subsequent abortions: A randomised controlled trial |
title_full | Specialist follow-up contraceptive support after abortion—Impact on effective contraceptive use at six months and subsequent abortions: A randomised controlled trial |
title_fullStr | Specialist follow-up contraceptive support after abortion—Impact on effective contraceptive use at six months and subsequent abortions: A randomised controlled trial |
title_full_unstemmed | Specialist follow-up contraceptive support after abortion—Impact on effective contraceptive use at six months and subsequent abortions: A randomised controlled trial |
title_short | Specialist follow-up contraceptive support after abortion—Impact on effective contraceptive use at six months and subsequent abortions: A randomised controlled trial |
title_sort | specialist follow-up contraceptive support after abortion—impact on effective contraceptive use at six months and subsequent abortions: a randomised controlled trial |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6559659/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31185058 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0217902 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT kumarusha specialistfollowupcontraceptivesupportafterabortionimpactoneffectivecontraceptiveuseatsixmonthsandsubsequentabortionsarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT pollardlouise specialistfollowupcontraceptivesupportafterabortionimpactoneffectivecontraceptiveuseatsixmonthsandsubsequentabortionsarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT campbelllucy specialistfollowupcontraceptivesupportafterabortionimpactoneffectivecontraceptiveuseatsixmonthsandsubsequentabortionsarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT yurdakulselin specialistfollowupcontraceptivesupportafterabortionimpactoneffectivecontraceptiveuseatsixmonthsandsubsequentabortionsarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT calveteclaracantalapiedra specialistfollowupcontraceptivesupportafterabortionimpactoneffectivecontraceptiveuseatsixmonthsandsubsequentabortionsarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT cokerbola specialistfollowupcontraceptivesupportafterabortionimpactoneffectivecontraceptiveuseatsixmonthsandsubsequentabortionsarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT chentao specialistfollowupcontraceptivesupportafterabortionimpactoneffectivecontraceptiveuseatsixmonthsandsubsequentabortionsarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT douiriabdel specialistfollowupcontraceptivesupportafterabortionimpactoneffectivecontraceptiveuseatsixmonthsandsubsequentabortionsarandomisedcontrolledtrial |