Pregnancy after Tubal Sterilization in the United States, 2002 to 2015.

BACKGROUND: Tubal sterilization is the most commonly used method of contraception in the United States. Because contraceptive effectiveness influences contraceptive selection, we examined typical use failure rates after tubal sterilization in the United States. METHODS: We estimated rates of pregnancy after tubal sterilization using data from four waves of the National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG), representative samples of U.S. women aged 15 to 44 years, collected in 2002, 2006 to 2010, 2011 to 2013, and 2013 to 2015. Survey weighting was used in survival analysis to examine time to first pregnancy after tubal sterilization. Data from these participants were censored after a tubal reversal procedure, infertility treatment, hysterectomy, or bilateral oophorectomy. Reported pregnancy rates after tubal sterilization procedures were examined by using Kaplan-Meier curves and then multivariable Cox proportional-hazards models to examine the effects of age at tubal sterilization, race/ethnicity, education, Medicaid funding, and postpartum versus interval procedures. RESULTS: Pregnancy after tubal sterilization was reported by 2.9 to 5.2% of participants across NSFG waves. In the most recent survey wave (2013 to 2015), the estimated percentage of participants with pregnancies within the first 12 months after a tubal sterilization procedure was 2.9%; at 120 months after tubal sterilization, the estimated percentage with a pregnancy was 8.4%. At all the time points examined, pregnancy after tubal sterilization was less common after postpartum procedures than after interval procedures; however, this difference was not evident in multivariable models. In multivariable models, chance of pregnancy decreased with age at time of tubal sterilization. Race/ethnicity, education, and Medicaid funding were not consistently associated with pregnancy after tubal sterilization. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that there may be nontrivial rates of pregnancy after tubal sterilization.

Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Intrauterine Contraception and Tubal Ligation.

BACKGROUND: Tubal ligation remains common in the USA, especially among low-income patients. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness and safety of intrauterine contraceptives (IUC) to laparoscopic tubal ligation for Medicaid clients. DESIGN: We partnered with patient and clinician stakeholders to conduct a retrospective cohort study using California Medicaid claims for patients who had an IUC placed or laparoscopic tubal ligation performed in 2008-2014, excluding procedures performed within 42 days of a birth. We applied log-linear (Poisson) event-history regression models for clustered person-period data to adjust for sociodemographic variables and pre-procedure health status when examining associations between these contraceptive procedures and claims related to contraceptive failure, complications, and pain in the first year post-procedure. KEY RESULTS: We identified 35,705 patients who had a levonorgestrel IUC placed, 23,628 patients who had a copper IUC placed, and 23,965 patients who underwent laparoscopic tubal ligation. In unadjusted analyses, rates of pregnancy within 1 year were similar following levonorgestrel IUC (2.40%) or copper IUC placement (2.99%) or tubal ligation (2.64%). In adjusted analyses, compared to tubal ligation, pregnancy was less common following placement of a levonorgestrel IUC (adj IRR 0.72, 95% CI 0.64-0.82) and similar with placement of a copper IUC (adj IRR 0.92, 95% CI 0.82-1.05). Procedural complications such as infection (0.35% vs. 2.91%) were significantly less common with IUC placement than tubal ligation. Claims for pelvic and abdominal pain decreased in frequency with time since all procedures; 6 to 12 months post-procedure, pelvic pain claims were less common after levonorgestrel IUC (adj IRR 0.69, 95% CI 0.65-0.73) or copper IUC placement (adj IRR 0.70, 95% CI 0.66-0.75) than tubal ligation. CONCLUSIONS: IUC appears at least as effective as laparoscopic tubal ligation at 1-year post-procedure with lower rates of infection and pelvic pain 6 to 12 months post-procedure. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03438682.

Counseling About the Maternal Health Benefits of Breastfeeding and Mothers' Intentions to Breastfeed.

Objectives To evaluate the impact of counseling regarding the maternal health effects of lactation on pregnant women's intentions to breastfeed. Methods Women seeking prenatal care at an urban university hospital completed surveys before and after receiving a 5-min counseling intervention regarding the maternal health effects of breastfeeding. The counseling was delivered by student volunteers using a script and one-page infographic. Participants were asked the likelihood that breastfeeding affects maternal risk of multiple chronic conditions using 7-point Likert scales. We compared pre/post changes in individual item responses and a summary score of knowledge of the maternal health benefits of lactation (MHBL) using paired t tests. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine the impact of increases in knowledge of MHBL on participants' intentions to breastfeed. Results The average age of the 65 participants was 24 ± 6 years. Most (72 %) were African-American and few (9 %) had college degrees. Half (50 %) had previously given birth, but few (21 %) had previously breastfed. Before counseling, few were aware of any benefits of lactation for maternal health. After counseling, knowledge of MHBL increased (mean knowledge score improved from 19/35 to 26/35, p < 0.001). Improvement in MHBL knowledge score was associated with increased intention to try breastfeeding (aOR 1.20, 95 % CI 1.02-1.42), of wanting to breastfeed (aOR 1.45, 95 % CI 1.13-1.86), and feeling that breastfeeding is important (aOR 1.21, 95 % CI 1.03-1.42). Conclusions for Practice Brief structured counseling regarding the effects of lactation on maternal health can increase awareness of the maternal health benefits of breastfeeding and strengthen pregnant women's intentions to breastfeed.