Format

Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014 Apr;210(4):311.e1-8. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2013.12.020. Epub 2013 Dec 13.

Interpregnancy intervals: impact of postpartum contraceptive effectiveness and coverage.

Author information

1
Bixby Center for Global Reproductive Health, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, School of Medicine, Sacramento, CA. Electronic address: heike.thiel@dhcs.ca.gov.
2
Bixby Center for Global Reproductive Health, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, School of Medicine, Sacramento, CA.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:

The purpose of this study was to determine the use of contraceptive methods, which was defined by effectiveness, length of coverage, and their association with short interpregnancy intervals, when controlling for provider type and client demographics.

STUDY DESIGN:

We identified a cohort of 117,644 women from the 2008 California Birth Statistical Master file with second or higher order birth and at least 1 Medicaid (Family Planning, Access, Care, and Treatment [Family PACT] program or Medi-Cal) claim within 18 months after index birth. We explored the effect of contraceptive method provision on the odds of having an optimal interpregnancy interval and controlled for covariates.

RESULTS:

The average length of contraceptive coverage was 3.81 months (SD = 4.84). Most women received user-dependent hormonal contraceptives as their most effective contraceptive method (55%; n = 65,103 women) and one-third (33%; n = 39,090 women) had no contraceptive claim. Women who used long-acting reversible contraceptive methods had 3.89 times the odds and women who used user-dependent hormonal methods had 1.89 times the odds of achieving an optimal birth interval compared with women who used barrier methods only; women with no method had 0.66 times the odds. When user-dependent methods are considered, the odds of having an optimal birth interval increased for each additional month of contraceptive coverage by 8% (odds ratio, 1.08; 95% confidence interval, 1.08-1.09). Women who were seen by Family PACT or by both Family PACT and Medi-Cal providers had significantly higher odds of optimal birth intervals compared with women who were served by Medi-Cal only.

CONCLUSION:

To achieve optimal birth spacing and ultimately to improve birth outcomes, attention should be given to contraceptive counseling and access to contraceptive methods in the postpartum period.

KEYWORDS:

Medicaid; contraceptive coverage; contraceptive effectiveness; interpregnancy interval; postpartum contraception

PMID:
24334205
DOI:
10.1016/j.ajog.2013.12.020
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Elsevier Science
    Loading ...
    Support Center