title: Characteristics of women in the United States who use long-acting reversible contraceptive methods.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To examine characteristics of U.S. women that are associated with use of long-acting reversible contraception and changes in these characteristics between 2002 and 2006-2008.
  
  
  METHODS
  We analyzed data from two nationally representative samples of women aged 15-44 in the National Survey of Family Growth, including 7,643 women in 2002 and 7,356 women in 2006-2008. We conducted simple and multinomial logistic regression analyses to identify demographic and reproductive health characteristics associated with use of long-acting reversible contraception.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Long-acting reversible contraception (intrauterine devices and subdermal implants) use among U.S. women using contraception increased from 2.4% in 2002 to 5.6% in 2006-2008. The largest increases in long-acting reversible contraception use during this time occurred among the youngest and oldest age groups, non-Hispanic white and non-Hispanic African American women, foreign-born women, and those in the highest income group. High prevalence of long-acting reversible contraception use in 2006-2008 was seen among women who had given birth once or twice (10%), foreign-born women (8.8%), and Hispanic women (8.4%). After adjusting for key demographic and reproductive health characteristics, in comparison with users of other contraceptive methods and with those not using contraception who were at risk for unintended pregnancy, foreign-born women and women who experienced coitarche before age 18 were approximately twice as likely to be using long-acting reversible contraception as women without those characteristics.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  A more diverse population of women used long-acting reversible contraception in 2006-2008 compared with 2002. However, there is likely more potential for increased uptake, especially among populations historically not considered to be candidates for these methods.
authors: From the Guttmacher Institute, Research Division, New York, New York; and FHI, Clinical Research Department, Durham, North Carolina.
authors: Megan L
authors: ML
authors: Kavanaugh
authors: Jenna
authors: J
authors: Jerman
authors: David
authors: D
authors: Hubacher
authors: Kathryn
authors: K
authors: Kost
authors: Lawrence B
authors: LB
authors: Finer
references: Finer LB, Henshaw SK. Disparities in rates of unintended pregnancy in the United States, 1994 and 2001. Perspect Sex Reprod Health 2006;38:90–6.
references: Jones RK, Darroch JE, Henshaw SK. Contraceptive use among U.S. women having abortions in 2000–2001. Perspect Sex Reprod Health 2002;34:294–303.
references: Mosher WD, Jones J. Use of contraception in the United States: 1982–2008. Vital Health Stat 2010;29:1–44.
references: Kost K, Singh S, Vaughan B, Trussell J, Bankole A. Estimates of contraceptive failure from the 2002 National Survey of Family Growth. Contraception 2008;77:10–21.
references: Hatcher RA, Trussell J, Nelson AL, Cates W Jr, Stewart FH, Kowal D. Contraceptive technology. 19th revised ed. New York (NY): Ardent Media; 2007.
references: Chandra A, Martinez GM, Mosher WD, Abma JC, Jones J. Fertility, family planning, and reproductive health of U.S. women: data from the 2002 National Survey of Family Growth. Vital Health Stat 2005;25:1–160.
references: Clifton D, Kaneda T, Ashford L. Family planning worldwide 2008 data sheet. Washington (DC): Population Reference Bureau; 2008.
references: Hubacher D. The checkered history and bright future of intrauterine contraception in the United States. Perspect Sex Reprod Health 2002;34:98–103.
references: Lepkowski JM, Mosher WD, Davis KE, Groves RM, Van HJ. The 2006–2010 National Survey of Family Growth: sample design and analysis of a continuous survey. Vital Health Stat 2010;150:1–36.
references: Hubacher D, Finer LB, Epsey E. Renewed interest in intrauterine contraception in the United States: Evidence and explanation. Contraception 2011;83:291–4.
references: Intrauterine device. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 59. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Obstet Gynecol 2005;105:223–32.
references: Intrauterine device and adolescents. ACOG Committee Opinion No. 392. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Obstet Gynecol 2007;110:1493–5.
references: Chan LM, Westhoff CL. Tubal sterilization trends in the United States. Fertil Steril 2010;94:1–6.
references: Frost JJ, Darroch JE. Factors associated with contraceptive choice and inconsistent method use, United States, 2004. Perspect Sex Reprod Health 2008;40:94–104.
references: Matteson KA, Peipert JF, Allsworth J, Phipps MG, Redding CA. Unplanned pregnancy: does past experience influence the use of a contraceptive method? Obstet Gynecol 2006;107:121–7.
references: Fu H, Darroch JE, Henshaw SK, Kolb E. Measuring the extent of abortion underreporting in the 1995 National Survey of Family Growth. Fam Plann Perspect 1998;30:128–33, 138.
references: Speidel JJ, Harper CC, Shields WC. The potential of long-acting reversible contraception to decrease unintended pregnancy. Contraception 2008;78:197–200.
references: Secura GM, Allsworth JE, Madden T, Mullersman JL, Peirpert JF. The Contraceptive CHOICE Project: reducing barriers to long-acting reversible contraception. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2011;203:115.e1–7.
references: Finer LB, Henshaw SK. Disparities in rates of unintended pregnancy in the United States, 1994 and 2001. Perspect Sex Reprod Health 2006;38:90–6.