'I feel like a person has a right to use a product to protect themselves…': a qualitative study of the risk-benefit calculus on women's contraceptive use and choice
- PMID: 32586415
- PMCID: PMC8853632
- DOI: 10.1071/SH19197
'I feel like a person has a right to use a product to protect themselves…': a qualitative study of the risk-benefit calculus on women's contraceptive use and choice
Abstract
Background Reducing pregnancy risk requires a multidimensional approach to sexual and reproductive health product development. The purpose of this analysis is to identify, compare, and contrast women's pre-use beliefs and attitudes about three different forms of contraceptives: intravaginal rings; spermicide in conjunction with condoms; and oral contraceptive pills - and explore how those attitudes and beliefs, along with actual method-use experience, may affect potential choices in contraceptive method moving forward. The relationship of beliefs and attitudes to their risk-benefit calculations when using these methods was also considered.?
Methods: Women used one or more contraceptive methods, each for 3-6 months. Qualitative data from individual in-depth interviews completed after each 3-month use period were analysed using a summary matrix framework. Data were extracted and summarised into themes. Each woman's experiences were compared among the methods she used; comparisons were also made across participants.
Results: The data consist of 33 90-120 min in-depth qualitative interviews from 16 women aged 20-34 years, in which they discussed various elements of their method use experience. One prominent theme was identified: the influence of attitudes and beliefs on the risk-benefit calculus. There were six key elements within the theme: pregnancy prevention; dosing and the potential for user error; side-effects; familiarity; disclosure; and sexual partnerships.
Conclusions: Women weighed perceived risks and benefits in their decision-making and, ultimately, their contraception choices. Understanding women's beliefs and attitudes that contribute to a calculation of risk-benefit can inform the development of sexual and reproductive health products.
Conflict of interest statement
Conflicts of interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Similar articles
-
What do young Australian women want (when talking to doctors about contraception)?BMC Fam Pract. 2017 Mar 15;18(1):35. doi: 10.1186/s12875-017-0616-2. BMC Fam Pract. 2017. PMID: 28298197 Free PMC article.
-
Beliefs and misconceptions about contraception and condom use among adolescents in south-east Nigeria.Reprod Health. 2021 Jan 6;18(1):7. doi: 10.1186/s12978-020-01062-y. Reprod Health. 2021. PMID: 33407642 Free PMC article.
-
Relationship between contraceptive method choice and beliefs about HIV and pregnancy prevention.Sex Transm Dis. 1994 Jan-Feb;21(1):5-7. doi: 10.1097/00007435-199401000-00002. Sex Transm Dis. 1994. PMID: 8140490
-
Women's Contraceptive Perceptions, Beliefs, and Attitudes: An Integrative Review of Qualitative Research.J Midwifery Womens Health. 2020 Jan;65(1):64-84. doi: 10.1111/jmwh.12992. Epub 2019 May 28. J Midwifery Womens Health. 2020. PMID: 31135081 Review.
-
Canadian Contraception Consensus (Part 1 of 4).J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2015 Oct;37(10):936-42. doi: 10.1016/s1701-2163(16)30033-0. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2015. PMID: 26606712 English, French.
Cited by
-
Norwegian women's experiences and opinions on contraceptive counselling: A systematic textcondensation study.Eur J Midwifery. 2021 Feb 3;5:4. doi: 10.18332/ejm/132224. eCollection 2021. Eur J Midwifery. 2021. PMID: 33554056 Free PMC article.
References
-
- DeMaria AL, Sundstrom B, Faria AA, Moxley Saxon G, Ramos-Ortiz J. Using the theory of planned behavior and self-identity to explore women’s decision-making and intention to switch from combined oral contraceptive pill (COC) to long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARC). BMC Womens Health 2019; 19: 82. doi:10.1186/s12905-019-0772-8 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
-
- Contraception Lowe P. and heterosex: an intimate relationship. Sexualities 2005; 8: 75–92. doi:10.1177/1363460705049575 - DOI
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical