Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Improvements in Contraception for Adolescents

  • Family Planning (A Burke, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Obstetrics and Gynecology Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Improved contraceptive use has been cited as the main contributor to the dramatic decrease in adolescent pregnancy and birth in the USA. This review will explore empirical literature that underlies the recent trends in contraceptive use for adolescents.

Recent Findings

Three major categories of findings were identified in our review. First, formal contraceptive practice recommendations from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention remove some barriers to contraceptive care that may be particularly relevant for adolescents. The most important of these (1) indicates that the use of any contraceptive should not be limited to age or parity alone and (2) supports immediate initiation when appropriate. Implementation of these recommendations into clinical care is variable, and barriers to adopting evidence-based practices are complex. Second, a substantial body of literature has accumulated around the use of long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) in adolescents. Adolescents have high acceptance of LARC when it is offered, high continuation, and high satisfaction. Interventions that improved adolescent contraception with increased LARC use have resulted in decreased teen pregnancy, birth, and abortion. Third, emerging research focuses on innovations regarding approach and location of contraceptive service delivery for adolescents, including non-primary care clinical settings, school-based settings, and over-the-counter.

Summary

Improved contraception for adolescents has been multifactorial and impactful. Dissemination and implementation of these recent findings as well as ongoing study of innovations that meet the unique needs of adolescents will continue this trend.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Osterman MJ, Births in the United States. NCHS. Data Brief. 2015;2016(258):1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Counting It Up: Key Data. 2013, The National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy.

  3. Santelli JS, et al. Explaining recent declines in adolescent pregnancy in the United States: the contribution of abstinence and improved contraceptive use. Am J Public Health. 2007;97(1):150–6.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. • Lindberg L, Santelli J, Desai S. Understanding the decline in adolescent fertility in the United States, 2007-2012. J Adolesc Health. 2016;59(5):577–83. This study evaluates the factors that underlie the more recent reduction in teen birth.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Richards MJ, Buyers E. Update on adolescent contraception. Adv Pediatr Infect Dis. 2016;63(1):429–51.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Hartman LB, Monasterio E, Hwang LY. Adolescent contraception: review and guidance for pediatric clinicians. Curr Probl Pediatr Adolesc Health Care. 2012;42(9):221–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Martinez GM, Abma JC. Sexual activity, contraceptive use, and childbearing of teens aged 15-19 in the United States. NCHS Data Brief. 2015. No. 209.

  8. Branum AM, Jones J. Trends in long-acting reversible contraception use among U.S. women aged 15-44. NCHS Data Brief. 2015;(188): p. 1–8.

  9. U. S. Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2010;59(RR-4):1–86.

    Google Scholar 

  10. •• Curtis KM, et al. U.S. Medical Eligibility Criteria for contraceptive use, 2016. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2016;65(3):1–103. This is an essential document for the delivery of contraception to anyone of any age. Available in multiple modalities including an app and an e-book.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. U.S. Selected Practice Recommendations for Contraceptive Use, 2013. Adapted from the World Health Organization selected practice recommendations for contraceptive use, 2nd edition. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2013;62(RR-05):1–60.

    Google Scholar 

  12. •• Curtis KM, et al. U.S. Selected Practice Recommendations for Contraceptive Use, 2016. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2016;65(4):1–66. This is an essential document for the delivery of contraception to anyone of any age. Available in multiple modalities including an app and an e-book.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Tepper NK, Marchbanks PA, Curtis KM. Use of a checklist to rule out pregnancy: a systematic review. Contraception. 2013;87(5):661–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Min J, et al. Performance of a checklist to exclude pregnancy at the time of contraceptive initiation among women with a negative urine pregnancy test. Contraception. 2015;91(1):80–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Whiteman MK, et al. Using a checklist to assess pregnancy in teenagers and young women. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123(4):777–84.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Usinger KM, et al. Intrauterine contraception continuation in adolescents and young women: a systematic review. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2016;29(6):659–67.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Birgisson NE, et al. Positive testing for Neisseria gonorrhoeae and chlamydia trachomatis and the risk of pelvic inflammatory disease in IUD users. J Women’s Health (Larchmt). 2015;24(5):354–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. • Hoopes AJ, et al. 2016 updates to US Medical eligibility criteria for contraceptive use and selected practice recommendations for contraceptive use: highlights for adolescent patients. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2017. This is a summary of key components of the MEC and SPR with an adolescent focus.

  19. Centers for Disease Control. June 1, 2017; Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/contraception/unintendedpregnancy/training.htm.

  20. ACOG Committee Opinion No. 577. Understanding and using the U.S. Selected Practice Recommendations for Contraceptive Use. Obstet Gynecol. 2013;122(5):1132–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Klein DA, Arnold JJ, Reese ES. Provision of contraception: key recommendations from the CDC. Am Fam Physician. 2015;91(9):625–33.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Romero LM, et al. Improving the implementation of evidence-based clinical practices in adolescent reproductive health care services. J Adolesc Health. 2015;57(5):488–95.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. • Romero LM, et al. Efforts to increase implementation of evidence-based clinical practices to improve adolescent-friendly reproductive health services. J Adolesc Health. 2017;60(3S):S30–7. This is an important study that explores the challenges of putting evidence-based recommendations into practice. It is one of the few that look to implementation science in the field of inquiry.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Hallum-Montes R, et al. Barriers and facilitators to health center implementation of evidence-based clinical practices in adolescent reproductive health services. J Adolesc Health. 2016;58(3):276–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Pritt NM, Norris AH, Berlan ED. Barriers and facilitators to adolescents’ use of long-acting reversible contraceptives. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2017;30(1):18–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Biggs MA, et al. Same-day LARC insertion attitudes and practices. Contraception. 2013;88(5):629–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Berlan ED, Pritt NM, Norris AH. Pediatricians’ attitudes and beliefs about long-acting reversible contraceptives influence counseling. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2017;30(1):47–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Rubin SE, et al. Louisiana and Mississippi family physicians’ contraception counseling for adolescents with a focus on intrauterine contraception. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2016;29(5):458–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Rubin SE, Campos G, Markens S. Primary care physicians’ concerns may affect adolescents’ access to intrauterine contraception. J Prim Care Community Health. 2013;4(3):216–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. ACOG Committee opinion no. 539. Adolescents and long-acting reversible contraception: implants and intrauterine devices. Obstet Gynecol. 2012;120(4):983–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Committee on Adolescence. Contraception for adolescents. Pediatrics. 2014;134(4):e1244–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. •• Ott MA, Sucato GS, Committee on Adolescence. Contraception for adolescents. Pediatrics. 2014;134(4):e1257–81. This is the technical document published by the AAP that provides guidance for pediatricians in contraception for adolescents. It is important and pragmatic.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. • McNicholas C, et al. The contraceptive CHOICE project round up: what we did and what we learned. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2014;57(4):635–43. A summary of key findings of the CHOICE project, adolescents and adults.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Diedrich JT, et al. Three-year continuation of reversible contraception. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;213(5):662 e1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. • Winner B, et al. Effectiveness of long-acting reversible contraception. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(21):1998–2007. This is a landmark study that demonstrates that LARC methods work much better at preventing unintended pregnancy in a cohort of women.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. •• Secura GM, et al. Provision of no-cost, long-acting contraception and teenage pregnancy. N Engl J Med. 2014;371(14):1316–23. A CHOICE project study that demonstrates dramatic decreases in teen pregnancy, birth, and abortion during the study period.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. •• Ricketts S, Klingler G, Schwalberg R. Game change in Colorado: widespread use of long-acting reversible contraceptives and rapid decline in births among young, low-income women. Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2014;46(3):125–32. This study demonstrates the impact of a state-wide approach to improving contraceptive delivery for young women.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Diedrich JT, Klein DA, Peipert JF, Long-acting reversible contraception in adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016.

  39. •• Tocce KM, Sheeder JL, Teal SB. Rapid repeat pregnancy in adolescents: do immediate postpartum contraceptive implants make a difference? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;206(6):481.e1–7. This is one of the first studies that shows the potential impact of offering teen mothers highly effective contraception after birth.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Wilson S, et al. Immediate postpartum etonogestrel implant: a contraception option with long-term continuation. Contraception. 2014;90(3):259–64.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Cohen R, et al. Twelve-month contraceptive continuation and repeat pregnancy among young mothers choosing postdelivery contraceptive implants or postplacental intrauterine devices. Contraception. 2016;93(2):178–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Damle LF, et al. Early initiation of postpartum contraception: does it decrease rapid repeat pregnancy in adolescents? J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2015;28(1):57–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Han L, et al. Preventing repeat pregnancy in adolescents: is immediate postpartum insertion of the contraceptive implant cost effective? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;211(1):24.e1–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Teal SB, et al. Insertion characteristics of intrauterine devices in adolescents and young women: success, ancillary measures, and complications. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;213(4):515.e1–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Madden T, et al. Association of age and parity with intrauterine device expulsion. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;124(4):718–26.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Garbers S, et al. Continuation of copper-containing intrauterine devices at 6 months. Contraception. 2013;87(1):101–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Ravi A, et al. Intrauterine devices at six months: does patient age matter? Results from an urban family medicine federally qualified health center (FQHC) network. J Am Board Fam Med. 2014;27(6):822–30.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Aoun J, et al. Effects of age, parity, and device type on complications and discontinuation of intrauterine devices. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123(3):585–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Behringer T, et al. Duration of use of a levonorgestrel IUS amongst nulliparous and adolescent women. Contraception. 2011;84(5):e5–e10.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  50. Maslyanskaya S, et al. Predictors of early discontinuation of effective contraception by teens at high risk of pregnancy. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2016;29(3):269–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Grunloh DS, et al. Characteristics associated with discontinuation of long-acting reversible contraception within the first 6 months of use. Obstet Gynecol. 2013;122(6):1214–21.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Hoggart L, Newton VL, Dickson J. “I think it depends on the body, with mine it didn’t work”: explaining young women’s contraceptive implant removal. Contraception. 2013;88(5):636–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Lunde B, et al. “Just wear dark underpants mainly”: learning from adolescents’ and young adults’ experiences with early discontinuation of the contraceptive implant. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2017.

  54. Deokar AM, Jackson W, Omar HA. Menstrual bleeding patterns in adolescents using etonogestrel (ENG) implant. Int J Adolesc Med Health. 2011;23(1):75–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Hoggart L, Newton VL. Young women’s experiences of side-effects from contraceptive implants: a challenge to bodily control. Reprod Health Matters. 2013;21(41):196–204.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Gomez AM, et al. Do knowledge and attitudes regarding intrauterine devices predict interest in their use? Womens Health Issues. 2015;25(4):359–65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Kumar N, Brown JD. Access barriers to long-acting reversible contraceptives for adolescents. J Adolesc Health. 2016;59(3):248–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Teal SB, Romer SE. Awareness of long-acting reversible contraception among teens and young adults. J Adolesc Health. 2013;52(4 Suppl):S35–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Barrett M, et al. Awareness and knowledge of the intrauterine device in adolescents. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2012;25(1):39–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Potter J, Rubin SE, Sherman P. Fear of intrauterine contraception among adolescents in New York City. Contraception. 2014;89(5):446–50.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  61. Sundstrom B, Baker-Whitcomb A, DeMaria AL. A qualitative analysis of long-acting reversible contraception. Matern Child Health J. 2015;19(7):1507–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. • Kavanaugh ML, et al. Long-acting reversible contraception for adolescents and young adults: patient and provider perspectives. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2013;26(2):86–95. This study is important for every clinician to read and helps illustrate that what is important to us as providers may not be so important to patients.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Dehlendorf C, et al. A qualitative analysis of approaches to contraceptive counseling. Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2014;46(4):233–40.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  64. Gavin L, et al. Providing quality family planning services: recommendations of CDC and the U.S. Office of Population Affairs. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2014;63(RR-04):1–54.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Copen CE, Dittus PJ, and Leichliter JS. Confidentiality concerns and sexual and reproductive health care among adolescents and young adults aged 15-25. NCHS data brief, 2016. no 266.

  66. State Laws and Policies: An Overview of Minors’ Consent Law. Guttmacher Institute; 2017.

  67. ACOG Committee Opinion no. .599: Committee on Adoscent Health Care: adolescent confidentiality and electronic health records. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123(5):1148–50.

  68. Ford C, English A, Sigman G. Confidential health care for adolescents: position paper for the society for adolescent medicine. J Adolesc Health. 2004;35(2):160–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Minguez M, et al. Reproductive health impact of a school health center. J Adolesc Health. 2015;56(3):338–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Sangraula M, et al. Integrating long-acting reversible contraception services into New York City school-based health centers: quality improvement to ensure provision of youth-friendly services. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2016.

  71. Daley AM. Contraceptive services in SBHCs: a community experience in creating change. Policy Polit Nurs Pract. 2011;12(4):208–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Ethier KA, et al. School-based health center access, reproductive health care, and contraceptive use among sexually experienced high school students. J Adolesc Health. 2011;48(6):562–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Guss CE, et al. Using the hospital as a venue for reproductive health interventions: a survey of hospitalized adolescents. Hosp Pediatr. 2015;5(2):67–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Schwarz EB, et al. Computer-assisted provision of hormonal contraception in acute care settings. Contraception. 2013;87(2):242–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Chernick LS, et al. Barriers to and enablers of contraceptive use among adolescent females and their interest in an emergency department based intervention. Contraception. 2015;91(3):217–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Chernick LS, et al. Enhancing referral of sexually active adolescent females from the emergency department to family planning. J Women’s Health (Larchmt). 2015;24(4):324–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Koyama A, Dorfman DH, Forcier MM. Long-acting reversible contraception in the pediatric emergency department: clinical implications and common challenges. Pediatr Emerg Care. 2015;31(4):286–92. quiz 293-5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Gonsalves L, Hindin MJ. Pharmacy provision of sexual and reproductive health commodities to young people: a systematic literature review and synthesis of the evidence. Contraception. 2016.

  79. Manski R, Kottke M. A survey of teenagers’ attitudes toward moving oral contraceptives over the counter. Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2015;47(3):123–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Upadhya KK, et al. Over-the-counter access to oral contraceptives for adolescents. J Adolesc Health. 2017;60(6):634–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Hall KS, Westhoff CL, Castaño PM. The impact of an educational text message intervention on young urban women’s knowledge of oral contraception. Contraception. 2013;87(4):449–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Hall KS, Castaño PM, Westhoff CL. The influence of oral contraceptive knowledge on oral contraceptive continuation among young women. J Women’s Health (Larchmt). 2014;23(7):596–601.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Crosby R, Salazar LF. Reduction of condom use errors from a brief, clinic-based intervention: a secondary analysis of data from a randomised, controlled trial of young black males. Sex Transm Infect. 2015;91(2):111–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Williams RL, Fortenberry JD. Update on adolescent condom use. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2011;23(5):350–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Brown JL, et al. Multiple method contraception use among African American adolescents in four US cities. Infect Dis Obstet Gynecol. 2011;2011:765917.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  86. Higgins JA, et al. Dual method use at last sexual encounter: a nationally representative, episode-level analysis of US men and women. Contraception. 2014;90(4):399–406.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  87. Hood JE, et al. Dual contraceptive use among adolescents and young adults: correlates and implications for condom use and sexually transmitted infection outcomes. J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care. 2014;40(3):200–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Kottke M, et al. Use of dual methods for protection from unintended pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases in adolescent African American women. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2015;28(6):543–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  89. Williams RL, Fortenberry JD. Dual use of long-acting reversible contraceptives and condoms among adolescents. J Adolesc Health. 2013;52(4 Suppl):S29–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Jane Fonda Center, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA

    Melissa Kottke

  2. Division of Family Planning, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA

    Tiffany Hailstorks

Authors
  1. Melissa Kottke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tiffany Hailstorks
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Melissa Kottke.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Tiffany Hailstorks declares no conflict of interest.

Melissa Kottke reports personal fees from Merck and Evofem, Inc.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Family Planning

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kottke, M., Hailstorks, T. Improvements in Contraception for Adolescents. Curr Obstet Gynecol Rep 6, 189–197 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13669-017-0214-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13669-017-0214-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation