Treffer: Computer-assisted Provision of Emergency Contraception a Randomized Controlled Trial
Division of Behavioral Sciences, Professionalism, and Ethics, Department of Preventive and Restorative Dental Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, CA, United States
Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco. CA, United States
CC BY 4.0
Sauf mention contraire ci-dessus, le contenu de cette notice bibliographique peut être utilisé dans le cadre d’une licence CC BY 4.0 Inist-CNRS / Unless otherwise stated above, the content of this bibliographic record may be used under a CC BY 4.0 licence by Inist-CNRS / A menos que se haya señalado antes, el contenido de este registro bibliográfico puede ser utilizado al amparo de una licencia CC BY 4.0 Inist-CNRS
Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine. Information processing
Weitere Informationen
BACKGROUND: Emergency contraception (EC) can prevent unintended pregnancy. However, many women continue to lack information needed to use EC effectively and clinician time to counsel women about EC is limited. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether computer-assisted provision of EC can increase knowledge and use of EC among women able to access EC without a prescription. DESIGN: We conducted a randomized controlled trial in which the intervention group received a 15-minute computerized educational session and 1 pack of EC. The control group received education about periconception folate supplementation, but no information about EC. Participants were contacted 7 months after enrollment. PARTICIPANTS: Four hundred forty-six women recruited from 2 urgent care clinics in San Francisco in 2005. MEASUREMENTS: Knowledge of EC, use of EC, and self-reported pregnancy. RESULTS: At follow-up, women in the intervention group answered an average of 2 more questions about EC correctly than they had at baseline, whereas women in the control group answered only 1 more item correctly (2.0 vs 1.2, p <.001). There was a trend toward more use of EC during the study period in the intervention group (10% vs 4% of women followed, p = .06; 6% vs 3%, p =.09 of women enrolled). Fewer women in the intervention group were pregnant at the time of follow-up (0.8% vs 6.5%, p =.01 of women followed; 0.5% vs 4.0%, p =.01 of women enrolled). CONCLUSIONS: Computer-assisted provision of EC in urgent care waiting areas increased knowledge of EC in a state where EC had been available without a prescription for 3 years.