Medline ® Abstracts for References 14,61

BACKGROUND: Knowledge of contraceptive effectiveness is crucial to making an informed choice. The consumer has to comprehend the pros and cons of the contraceptive methods being considered. Choice may be influenced by understanding the likelihood of pregnancy with each method and factors that influence effectiveness.

OBJECTIVES: To review all randomized controlled trials comparing strategies for communicating to consumers the effectiveness of contraceptives in preventing pregnancy.

SEARCH METHODS: Through February 2013, we searched the computerized databases of MEDLINE, POPLINE, CENTRAL, PsycINFO and CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov, and ICTRP. Previous searches also included EMBASE. We also examined references lists of relevant articles. For the initial review, we wrote to known investigators for information about other published or unpublished trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials that compared methods for communicating contraceptive effectiveness to consumers. The comparison could be usual practice or analternative to the experimental intervention.Outcome measures were knowledge of contraceptive effectiveness, attitude about contraception or toward any particular contraceptive, and choice or use of contraceptive method.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: For the initial review, two authors independently extracted the data. One author entered the data into RevMan, and a second author verified accuracy. For the update, an author and a research associate extracted, entered, and checked the data.For dichotomous variables, we calculated the Mantel-Haenszel odds ratio with 95% confidence intervals (CI). For continuous variables, we computed the mean difference (MD) with 95% CI.

MAIN RESULTS: Seven trials met the inclusion criteria and had a total of 4526 women. Five were multi-site studies. Four trials were conducted in the USA, while Nigeria and Zambia were represented by one study each, and one trial was done in both Jamaica and India.Two trials provided multiple sessions for participants. In one study that examined contraceptive choice, women in the expanded program were more likely to choose sterilization (OR 4.26; 95% CI 2.46 to 7.37) or use a modern contraceptive method (OR 2.35; 95% CI 1.82 to 3.03), i.e., sterilization, pills, injectable, intrauterine device or barrier method. For the other study, the groups received educational interventions with differing format and intensity. Both groups reportedly had increases in contraceptive use, but they did not differ significantly by six months in consistent use of an effective contraceptive, i.e., sterilization, IUD, injectable, implant, and consistent use of oral contraceptives, diaphragm, or male condoms.Five trials provided one session and focused on testing educational material or media. In one study, knowledge gain favored a slide-and-sound presentation versus a physician's oral presentation (MD -19.00; 95% CI -27.52 to -10.48). In another trial, a table with contraceptive effectiveness categories led to more correct answers than a table based on pregnancy numbers [ORs were 2.42 (95% CI 1.43 to 4.12) and 2.19 (95% CI 1.21 to 3.97)]or a table with effectiveness categories and pregnancy numbers [ORs were 2.58 (95% CI 1.5 to 4.42) and 2.03 (95% CI 1.13 to 3.64)]. Still another trial provided structured counseling with a flipchart on contraceptive methods. The intervention and usual-care groups did not differ significantly in choice of contraceptive method (by effectiveness category) or in continuation of the chosen method at three months. Lastly, a study with couples used videos to communicate contraceptive information (control, motivational, contraceptive methods, and both motivational and methods videos). The analyses showed no significant difference between the groups in the types of contraceptives chosen.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: These trials varied greatly in the types of participants and interventions to communicate contraceptive effectiveness. Therefore, we cannot say overall what would help consumers choose an appropriate contraceptive method. For presenting pregnancy risk data, one trial showed that effectiveness categories were better than pregnancy numbers. In another trial, audiovisual aids worked better than the usual oral presentation. Strategies should be tested in clinical settings and measured for their effect on contraceptive choice. More detailed reporting of intervention content would help in interpreting results. Reports could also include whether the instruments used to assess knowledge or attitudes were tested for validity or reliability. Follow-up should be incorporated to assess retention of knowledge over time. The overall quality of evidencewas considered to be low for this review, given that five of the seven studies provided low or very low quality evidence.

BACKGROUND: Worldwide, hormonal contraceptives are among the most popular reversible contraceptives. Despite their high theoretical effectiveness, typical use results in much lower effectiveness. In large part, this disparity reflects difficulties in adherence to the contraceptive regimen and low rates for long-term continuation.

OBJECTIVES: The intent was to determine the effectiveness of ancillary counseling techniques to improve adherence to, and continuation of, hormonal methods of contraception.

SEARCH METHODS: Through August 2013, we searched computerized databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing client-provider interventions with standard family planning counseling. Sources included CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, POPLINE, ClinicalTrials.gov and ICTRP. Earlier searches also included LILACS, PsycINFO, Dissertation Abstracts, African Index Medicus, and IMEMR.

SELECTION CRITERIA: We included RCTs of an intensive counseling technique or other client-provider intervention compared to routine family planning counseling. Interventions included group motivation; structured, peer, or multi-component counseling; and intensive reminders of appointments or next dosing. Outcome measures were discontinuation, reasons for discontinuation, number of missed pills or on-time injections, and pregnancy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: One author evaluated the titles and abstracts from the searches to determine eligibility. Two authors extracted data from the included studies. We calculated the Mantel-Haenszel odds ratio (OR) for dichotomous outcomes. For continuous variables, the mean difference (MD) was computed; RevMan uses the inverse variance approach. For all analyses, 95% confidence intervals (CI) were also computed. Since the studies identified differed in both interventions and outcome measures, we did not conduct a meta-analysis.

MAIN RESULTS: Nine RCTs met our inclusion criteria. Five involved direct counseling; of those, two also provided multiple contacts by telephone. Four other trials provided intensive reminders, two of which also provided health education information. Three trials showed some benefit of the experimental intervention. In a counseling intervention, women who received repeated structured information about the injectable depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA) were less likely to discontinue the method by 12 months (OR 0.27; 95% CI 0.16 to 0.44) than women who had routine counseling. The intervention group was also less likely to discontinue due to menstrual disturbances (OR 0.20; 95% CI 0.11 to 0.37). Another trial showed a group with special counseling plus phone calls was more likely than the special-counseling group to report consistent use of oral contraceptives (OC) at 3 months (OR 1.41; 95% CI1.06 to 1.87), though not at 12 months. The group with only special counseling did not differ significantly from those with standard care for any outcome. The third trial compared daily text-message reminders about OCs plus health information versus standard care. Women in the text-message group were more likely than the standard-care group to continue OC use by six months (OR 1.54; 95% CI 1.14 to 2.10). The text-message group was also more likely to avoid an interruption in OC use longer than seven days (OR 1.53; 95% CI 1.13 to 2.07).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Only three trials showed some benefit of strategies to improve adherence and continuation. However, several had small sample sizes and six had high losses to follow up. The overall quality of evidence was considered moderate. The intervention type and intensity varied greatly across the studies. A combination of intensive counseling and multiple contacts and reminders may be needed to improve adherence and acceptability of contraceptive use. High-quality RCTs with adequate power and well-designed interventions could help identify ways to improve adherence to, and continuation of, hormonal contraceptive methods.