Journal of General Internal Medicine

, Volume 27, Issue 2, pp 196–201

Provision of Contraceptive Services to Women with Diabetes Mellitus

  • Eleanor Bimla Schwarz
  • Debbie Postlethwaite
  • Yun-Yi Hung
  • Eric Lantzman
  • Mary Anne Armstrong
  • Michael A. Horberg
Original Research

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND

Women with diabetes mellitus who delay pregnancy until glycemic control is achieved experience lower rates of adverse pregnancy outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To compare rates of provision of contraceptive services among women with diabetes mellitus and women without chronic medical conditions.

DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study of 459,181 women aged 15–44 who had continuous membership and pharmacy benefits in a managed care organization in Northern California between January 2006 and June 2007. Rates of documented provision of contraceptive counseling, prescriptions, and services were compared between women with diabetes and women without chronic medical conditions.

RESULTS

Among 8,182 women with diabetes and 122,921 women without any chronic conditions, women with diabetes were less likely than women without a chronic condition to have documented receipt of any contraceptive counseling, prescriptions, or services (47.8% vs 62.0%, p < 0.001). After controlling for age and race, women with diabetes were more likely to have undergone tubal sterilization compared to women without a chronic condition (OR = 1.41, 95% CI 1.30–1.54), but less likely to have received highly effective, reversible methods of contraception such as intrauterine contraception (OR = 0.68, 95% CI 0.61–0.75). In addition, more women with diabetes had undergone hysterectomy, which is rarely performed solely for contraceptive purposes.

CONCLUSIONS

Women with diabetes were less likely to receive highly effective reversible contraception and more likely to undergo sterilization procedures. Increasing the use of highly effective reversible contraceptives may help diabetic women who want to retain their fertility to delay pregnancy until glycemic control is achieved.

KEY WORDS

diabetes mellitus pregnancy contraception preconception counseling women 

References

  1. 1.
    Kinsley B. Achieving better outcomes in pregnancies complicated by type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus. Clin Ther. 2007;29(Suppl D):S153–60.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Willhoite MB, Bennert HW Jr, Palomaki GE, Zaremba MM, Herman WH, Williams JR, et al. The impact of preconception counseling on pregnancy outcomes. The experience of the Maine Diabetes in Pregnancy Program. Diabetes Care. 1993;16(2):450–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Finer LB, Henshaw SK. Disparities in rates of unintended pregnancy in the United States, 1994 and 2001. Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2006;38(2):90–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Schwarz EB, Maselli J, Gonzales R. Contraceptive counseling of diabetic women of reproductive age. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;107(5):1070–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chuang CH, Chase GA, Bensyl DM, Weisman CS. Contraceptive use by diabetic and obese women. Womens Health Issues. 2005;15(4):167–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cyganek K, Hebda-Szydlo A, Katra B, Skupien J, Klupa T, Janas I, et al. Glycemic control and selected pregnancy outcomes in type 1 diabetes women on continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion and multiple daily injections: the significance of pregnancy planning. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2010;12(1):41–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Yang J, Cummings EA, O'Connell C, Jangaard K. Fetal and neonatal outcomes of diabetic pregnancies. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;108(3 Pt 1):644–50.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Update on overall prevalence of major birth defects—Atlanta, Georgia, 1978–2005. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2008;11(57(1)):1–5..Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Johnson K, Posner SF, Biermann J, Cordero JF, Atrash HK, Parker CS, et al. Recommendations to improve preconception health and health care—United States. A report of the CDC/ATSDR Preconception Care Work Group and the Select Panel on Preconception Care. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2006;55(RR-6):1–23.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mahmud M, Mazza D. Preconception care of women with diabetes: a review of current guideline recommendations. BMC Womens Health. 2010;10:5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    D'Angelo D, Williams L, Morrow B, Cox S, Harris N, Harrison L, et al. Preconception and interconception health status of women who recently gave birth to a live-born infant—Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS), United States, 26 reporting areas, 2004. MMWR Surveill Summ. 2007;56(10):1–35.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kim C, Ferrara A, McEwen LN, Marrero DG, Gerzoff RB, Herman WH, et al. Preconception care in managed care: the translating research into action for diabetes study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;192(1):227–32.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Karter AJ, Ackerson LM, Darbinian JA, D'Agostino RB Jr, Ferrara A, Liu J, et al. Self-monitoring of blood glucose levels and glycemic control: the Northern California Kaiser Permanente Diabetes registry. Am J Med. 2001;111(1):1–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    World Health Organization. Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use [Book]. Geneva 2009. Available from: http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2010/9789241563888_eng.pdf <accessed Aug 26, 2011>
  15. 15.
    Liu L, Allison JE, Herrinton LJ. Validity of computerized diagnoses, procedures, and drugs for inflammatory bowel disease in a northern California managed care organization. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2009;18(11):1086–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lawrence JM, Liu IL, Towner WJ. Trends and correlates of HIV testing during pregnancy in racially/ethnically diverse insured population, 1997–2006. Matern Child Health J. 2009;13(5):633–40.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Magid DJ, Shetterly SM, Margolis KL, Tavel HM, O'Connor PJ, Selby JV, et al. Comparative effectiveness of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors versus beta-blockers as second-line therapy for hypertension. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2010;3(5):453–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Steiner MJ, Dalebout S, Condon S, Dominik R, Trussell J. Understanding risk: a randomized controlled trial of communicating contraceptive effectiveness. Obstet Gynecol. 2003;102(4):709–17.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cowie CC, Rust KF, Ford ES, Eberhardt MS, Byrd-Holt DD, Li C, et al. Full accounting of diabetes and pre-diabetes in the US population in 1988–1994 and 2005–2006. Diabetes Care. 2009;32(2):287–94.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Allen VM, Armson BA, Wilson RD, Blight C, Gagnon A, Johnson JA, et al. Teratogenicity associated with pre-existing and gestational diabetes. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2007;29(11):927–44.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Boney CM, Verma A, Tucker R, Vohr BR. Metabolic syndrome in childhood: association with birth weight, maternal obesity, and gestational diabetes mellitus. Pediatrics. 2005;115(3):e290-6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Monea E, Thomas A. Unintended pregnancy and taxpayer spending. Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2011;43(2):88–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sonfield A, Kost K, Gold RB, Finer LB. The public costs of births resulting from unintended pregnancies: national and state-level estimates. Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2011;43(2):94–102.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Curtis KM, Mohllajee AP, Peterson HB. Regret following female sterilization at a young age: a systematic review. Contraception. 2006;73(2):205–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Curtis KM, Jamieson DJ, Peterson HB, Marchbanks PA. Adaptation of the World Health Organization's medical eligibility criteria for contraceptive use for use in the United States. Contraception. 2010;82(1):3–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lidegaard O, Lokkegaard E, Svendsen AL, Agger C. Hormonal contraception and risk of venous thromboembolism: national follow-up study. BMJ. 2009;339:b2890.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hatcher R, Trussell J, Stewart F, Nelson A, Cates W, Guest F, et al. Contraceptive Technology. 18th ed. New York: Ardent Media; 2004.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sivin I, el Mahgoub S, McCarthy T, Mishell DR Jr, Shoupe D, Alvarez F, et al. Long-term contraception with the levonorgestrel 20 mcg/day (LNg 20) and the copper T 380Ag intrauterine devices: a five-year randomized study. Contraception. 1990;42(4):361–78.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Akers AY, Gold MA, Borrero S, Santucci A, Schwarz EB. Providers' perspectives on challenges to contraceptive counseling in primary care settings. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2010;19(6):1163–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Krieger N. Overcoming the absence of socioeconomic data in medical records: validation and application of a census-based methodology. Am J Public Health. 1992;82(5):703–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of General Internal Medicine 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eleanor Bimla Schwarz
    • 1
  • Debbie Postlethwaite
    • 2
  • Yun-Yi Hung
    • 2
  • Eric Lantzman
    • 3
  • Mary Anne Armstrong
    • 2
  • Michael A. Horberg
    • 4
  1. 1.Departments of Medicine, Epidemiology, Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive SciencesUniversity of Pittsburgh, Center for Research on Health CarePittsburghUSA
  2. 2.Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern CaliforniaOaklandUSA
  3. 3.Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Southcentral FoundationAnchorageUSA
  4. 4.Mid-Atlantic Permanente Research InstituteRockvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations