Women's preferences for permanent contraception method and willingness to be randomized for a hypothetical trial

Adriana Piazza, Kelly Schwirian, Fiona Scott, Machelle D. Wilson, Nikki Zite, Mitchell D. Creinin

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To understand women's preferences for permanent contraception by salpingectomy or tubal occlusion following standardized counseling and evaluate the practicality of a future randomized trial. Study design: We invited pregnant and non-pregnant women planning permanent contraception at the University of California, Davis (UCD) and University of Tennessee (UT) Obstetrics and Gynecology clinics to participate. We enrolled women when they received routine counseling and signed procedure consent. Participants received standardized information sheets reviewing permanent contraception options based on pregnancy status then completed an anonymous survey with questions about demographics, method preference, and willingness to participate in a hypothetical randomized trial comparing salpingectomy and tubal occlusion. We evaluated predictors for salpingectomy preference using multivariable analysis. Results: From July 2015 to October 2016, we enrolled 75 women at UCD and 63 women at UT. Overall, respondents preferred salpingectomy (63.0%); among the 47 women not currently pregnant at both sites, 40 (85.1%) preferred salpingectomy, most commonly because of higher efficacy. Although population characteristics differed significantly between the sites, only UCD site (aOR 4.2; 95% CI 1.9, 9.4) and non-pregnancy status (aOR 4.2; 95% CI 1.6, 10.8) predicted preference for salpingectomy in the multivariable model. Most participants (n=84, 60.9%) would not be willing to be randomized to a theoretical trial comparing salpingectomy and tubal occlusion procedures. Conclusion: Among a diverse group of women from two different areas in the U.S. given a choice of permanent contraception methods, salpingectomy is preferred over tubal occlusion. Most women planning a permanent contraceptive procedure would not agree to a randomized comparison of these methods. Implications statement: Salpingectomy, which offers theoretically higher efficacy and potentially greater ovarian cancer protection compared to tubal occlusion, is preferred by the majority of patients and should be offered to all women seeking permanent contraception. Differences in method choices less likely reflect the patient population and more likely the counseling provided.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)56-60
Number of pages5
JournalContraception
Volume99
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2019

Fingerprint

Salpingectomy
Contraception
Tubal Sterilization
Counseling
Population Characteristics
Contraceptive Agents
Gynecology
Ovarian Neoplasms
Obstetrics
Demography

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Reproductive Medicine
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology

Cite this

Women's preferences for permanent contraception method and willingness to be randomized for a hypothetical trial. / Piazza, Adriana; Schwirian, Kelly; Scott, Fiona; Wilson, Machelle D.; Zite, Nikki; Creinin, Mitchell D.

In: Contraception, Vol. 99, No. 1, 01.01.2019, p. 56-60.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Piazza, Adriana ; Schwirian, Kelly ; Scott, Fiona ; Wilson, Machelle D. ; Zite, Nikki ; Creinin, Mitchell D. / Women's preferences for permanent contraception method and willingness to be randomized for a hypothetical trial. In: Contraception. 2019 ; Vol. 99, No. 1. pp. 56-60.
@article{1b4ad3c8e9064d36be64cd11e222ab7a,
title = "Women's preferences for permanent contraception method and willingness to be randomized for a hypothetical trial",
abstract = "Objective: To understand women's preferences for permanent contraception by salpingectomy or tubal occlusion following standardized counseling and evaluate the practicality of a future randomized trial. Study design: We invited pregnant and non-pregnant women planning permanent contraception at the University of California, Davis (UCD) and University of Tennessee (UT) Obstetrics and Gynecology clinics to participate. We enrolled women when they received routine counseling and signed procedure consent. Participants received standardized information sheets reviewing permanent contraception options based on pregnancy status then completed an anonymous survey with questions about demographics, method preference, and willingness to participate in a hypothetical randomized trial comparing salpingectomy and tubal occlusion. We evaluated predictors for salpingectomy preference using multivariable analysis. Results: From July 2015 to October 2016, we enrolled 75 women at UCD and 63 women at UT. Overall, respondents preferred salpingectomy (63.0{\%}); among the 47 women not currently pregnant at both sites, 40 (85.1{\%}) preferred salpingectomy, most commonly because of higher efficacy. Although population characteristics differed significantly between the sites, only UCD site (aOR 4.2; 95{\%} CI 1.9, 9.4) and non-pregnancy status (aOR 4.2; 95{\%} CI 1.6, 10.8) predicted preference for salpingectomy in the multivariable model. Most participants (n=84, 60.9{\%}) would not be willing to be randomized to a theoretical trial comparing salpingectomy and tubal occlusion procedures. Conclusion: Among a diverse group of women from two different areas in the U.S. given a choice of permanent contraception methods, salpingectomy is preferred over tubal occlusion. Most women planning a permanent contraceptive procedure would not agree to a randomized comparison of these methods. Implications statement: Salpingectomy, which offers theoretically higher efficacy and potentially greater ovarian cancer protection compared to tubal occlusion, is preferred by the majority of patients and should be offered to all women seeking permanent contraception. Differences in method choices less likely reflect the patient population and more likely the counseling provided.",
author = "Adriana Piazza and Kelly Schwirian and Fiona Scott and Wilson, {Machelle D.} and Nikki Zite and Creinin, {Mitchell D.}",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.contraception.2018.09.004",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "99",
pages = "56--60",
journal = "Contraception",
issn = "0010-7824",
publisher = "Elsevier USA",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Women's preferences for permanent contraception method and willingness to be randomized for a hypothetical trial

AU - Piazza, Adriana

AU - Schwirian, Kelly

AU - Scott, Fiona

AU - Wilson, Machelle D.

AU - Zite, Nikki

AU - Creinin, Mitchell D.

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - Objective: To understand women's preferences for permanent contraception by salpingectomy or tubal occlusion following standardized counseling and evaluate the practicality of a future randomized trial. Study design: We invited pregnant and non-pregnant women planning permanent contraception at the University of California, Davis (UCD) and University of Tennessee (UT) Obstetrics and Gynecology clinics to participate. We enrolled women when they received routine counseling and signed procedure consent. Participants received standardized information sheets reviewing permanent contraception options based on pregnancy status then completed an anonymous survey with questions about demographics, method preference, and willingness to participate in a hypothetical randomized trial comparing salpingectomy and tubal occlusion. We evaluated predictors for salpingectomy preference using multivariable analysis. Results: From July 2015 to October 2016, we enrolled 75 women at UCD and 63 women at UT. Overall, respondents preferred salpingectomy (63.0%); among the 47 women not currently pregnant at both sites, 40 (85.1%) preferred salpingectomy, most commonly because of higher efficacy. Although population characteristics differed significantly between the sites, only UCD site (aOR 4.2; 95% CI 1.9, 9.4) and non-pregnancy status (aOR 4.2; 95% CI 1.6, 10.8) predicted preference for salpingectomy in the multivariable model. Most participants (n=84, 60.9%) would not be willing to be randomized to a theoretical trial comparing salpingectomy and tubal occlusion procedures. Conclusion: Among a diverse group of women from two different areas in the U.S. given a choice of permanent contraception methods, salpingectomy is preferred over tubal occlusion. Most women planning a permanent contraceptive procedure would not agree to a randomized comparison of these methods. Implications statement: Salpingectomy, which offers theoretically higher efficacy and potentially greater ovarian cancer protection compared to tubal occlusion, is preferred by the majority of patients and should be offered to all women seeking permanent contraception. Differences in method choices less likely reflect the patient population and more likely the counseling provided.

AB - Objective: To understand women's preferences for permanent contraception by salpingectomy or tubal occlusion following standardized counseling and evaluate the practicality of a future randomized trial. Study design: We invited pregnant and non-pregnant women planning permanent contraception at the University of California, Davis (UCD) and University of Tennessee (UT) Obstetrics and Gynecology clinics to participate. We enrolled women when they received routine counseling and signed procedure consent. Participants received standardized information sheets reviewing permanent contraception options based on pregnancy status then completed an anonymous survey with questions about demographics, method preference, and willingness to participate in a hypothetical randomized trial comparing salpingectomy and tubal occlusion. We evaluated predictors for salpingectomy preference using multivariable analysis. Results: From July 2015 to October 2016, we enrolled 75 women at UCD and 63 women at UT. Overall, respondents preferred salpingectomy (63.0%); among the 47 women not currently pregnant at both sites, 40 (85.1%) preferred salpingectomy, most commonly because of higher efficacy. Although population characteristics differed significantly between the sites, only UCD site (aOR 4.2; 95% CI 1.9, 9.4) and non-pregnancy status (aOR 4.2; 95% CI 1.6, 10.8) predicted preference for salpingectomy in the multivariable model. Most participants (n=84, 60.9%) would not be willing to be randomized to a theoretical trial comparing salpingectomy and tubal occlusion procedures. Conclusion: Among a diverse group of women from two different areas in the U.S. given a choice of permanent contraception methods, salpingectomy is preferred over tubal occlusion. Most women planning a permanent contraceptive procedure would not agree to a randomized comparison of these methods. Implications statement: Salpingectomy, which offers theoretically higher efficacy and potentially greater ovarian cancer protection compared to tubal occlusion, is preferred by the majority of patients and should be offered to all women seeking permanent contraception. Differences in method choices less likely reflect the patient population and more likely the counseling provided.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85054361243&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85054361243&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.contraception.2018.09.004

DO - 10.1016/j.contraception.2018.09.004

M3 - Article

C2 - 30266212

AN - SCOPUS:85054361243

VL - 99

SP - 56

EP - 60

JO - Contraception

JF - Contraception

SN - 0010-7824

IS - 1

ER -