Vol 88, No 12 (2017)
Research paper
Published online: 2017-12-29
What influences women’s contraceptive choice? A cross-sectional study from Turkey
Abstract
Objectives: In our study, we tried to investigate the determinants of women’s choices about contraception with the aim of discovering whether or not there is a difference in their preferences before and after consultation with a gynaecologist.
Material and methods: A total of 1058 women were enrolled. They were given detailed information regarding contraception and contraceptive methods. Subsequently, a survey which was made of 21 questions was administered.
Results: Contraceptive counselling significantly changed the contraceptive choice of women. However, influences from social media and friends, their partners and religious belief affected their contraceptive choices. Significant differences in contraceptive choice were observed when women were categorized according to their marital status, education level, household income, age, and number of children.
Conclusions: Although contraceptive counselling influenced Turkish women’s choices, there were still other determinants like social media and input from outside sources such as clerics and husbands, which should be overcome.
Keywords: combined oral contraceptivecondomcontraceptionintrauterine devicetubal ligation
References
- Sedgh G, Singh S, Hussain R. Intended and unintended pregnancies worldwide in 2012 and recent trends. Stud Fam Plann. 2014; 45(3): 301–314.
- Ong J, Temple-Smith M, Wong WCW, et al. Contraception matters: indicators of poor usage of contraception in sexually active women attending family planning clinics in Victoria, Australia. BMC Public Health. 2012; 12: 1108.
- Donnelly KZ, Foster TC, Thompson R. What matters most? The content and concordance of patients' and providers' information priorities for contraceptive decision making. Contraception. 2014; 90(3): 280–287.
- Rosenstock J, Peipert J, Madden T, et al. Continuation of Reversible Contraception in Teenagers and Young Women. Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2012; 120(6): 1298–1305.
- Erol N, Durusoy R, Ergin I, et al. Unintended pregnancy and prenatal care: a study from a maternity hospital in Turkey. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2010; 15(4): 290–300.
- Hacettepe Universitesi Nufus Etutleri Enstitusu (HUNEE) Turkiye Nufus ve Saglik Arastirmasi. T.C. Kalkinma Bakanligi ve TUBITAK, Publication No. NEE-HÜ.09.01 ISBN 978-975-491-274-6 Ankara, Türkiye, 2013.
- Secura GM, Allsworth JE, Madden T, et al. The Contraceptive CHOICE Project: reducing barriers to long-acting reversible contraception. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010; 203(2): 115.e1–115.e7.
- Madden T, Secura GM, Allsworth JE, et al. Comparison of contraceptive method chosen by women with and without a recent history of induced abortion. Contraception. 2011; 84(6): 571–577.
- Shih SL, Kebodeaux CA, Secura GM, et al. Baseline correlates of inconsistent and incorrect condom use among sexually active women in the contraceptive CHOICE Project. Sex Transm Dis. 2011; 38(11): 1012–1019.
- Mestad R, Secura G, Allsworth JE, et al. Acceptance of long-acting reversible contraceptive methods by adolescent participants in the Contraceptive CHOICE Project. Contraception. 2011; 84(5): 493–498.
- Rosenstock JR, Peipert JF, Madden T, et al. Continuation of Reversible Contraception in Teenagers and Young Women. Obstet Gynecol. 2012; 120: 1298–1305.
- Elaut E, Buysse A, Caen M, et al. Contraceptive use in Flanders (Belgium): A comparison between a general population sample and a Turkish ethnic minority sample. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2015; 20(4): 283–295.
- Elm Ev, Altman D, Egger M, et al. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 2008; 61(4): 344–349.
- Grimes DA, Gallo MF, Grigorieva V, et al. Fertility awareness-based methods for contraception. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2004.
- Lawrie TA, Helmerhorst FM, Maitra NK, et al. Types of progestogens in combined oral contraception: effectiveness and side-effects. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011(5): CD004861.
- Lopez L, Newmann S, Grimes D, et al. Immediate start of hormonal contraceptives for contraception. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2012.
- Arrowsmith ME, Aicken CRH, Saxena S, et al. Strategies for improving the acceptability and acceptance of the copper intrauterine device. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012(3): CD008896.
- Lopez LM, Steiner M, Grimes DA, et al. Strategies for communicating contraceptive effectiveness. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013(4): CD006964.
- Dehlendorf C, Fox E, Sobel L, et al. Patient-Centered Contraceptive Counseling: Evidence to Inform Practice. Current Obstetrics and Gynecology Reports. 2016; 5(1): 55–63.
- Fiebig DG, Viney R, Knox S, et al. Consideration sets and their role in modelling doctor recommendations about contraceptives. Health Econ. 2017; 26: 54–73.
- Adebowale SA, Adedini SA, Ibisomi LD, et al. Differential effect of wealth quintile on modern contraceptive use and fertility: evidence from Malawian women. BMC Womens Health. 2014; 14(1): 40.
- Molloy GJ, Sweeney LA, Byrne M, et al. Prescription contraception use: a cross-sectional population study of psychosocial determinants. BMJ Open. 2015; 5(8): e007794.
- Alpu O, Fidan H. On the use of contraceptive methods among married women in Turkey. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2006; 11(3): 228–236.
- Cindoglu D, Sirkeci I, Sirkeci RF. Determinants of choosing withdrawal over modern contraceptive methods in Turkey. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2008; 13(4): 412–421.
- Dutta M, Husain Z. Do slum dwellers have lower contraceptive prevalence rates? An analysis of current use patterns in Calcutta, India. Asia-Pacific Population Journal. 2011; 26(4): 29–56.
