PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Baxter, Andrew
AU  - Geary, Rebecca S.
AU  - Dema, Emily
AU  - Pérez, Raquel Bosó
AU  - Riddell, Julie
AU  - Willis, Malachi
AU  - Conolly, Anne
AU  - Oakley, Laura
AU  - Copas, Andrew
AU  - Gibbs, Jo
AU  - Bonell, Chris
AU  - Sonnenberg, Pam
AU  - Mercer, Catherine H.
AU  - Clifton, Soazig
AU  - Field, Nigel
AU  - Mitchell, Kirstin
TI  - Contraceptive use and pregnancy planning in Britain during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic: findings from a large, quasi-representative survey (Natsal-COVID)
AID  - 10.1101/2022.10.14.22281078
DP  - 2022 Jan 01
TA  - medRxiv
PG  - 2022.10.14.22281078
4099  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/10/17/2022.10.14.22281078.short
4100  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/10/17/2022.10.14.22281078.full
AB  - Background Reproductive health services were significantly disrupted during the COVID-19 pandemic in Britain. We investigated contraception-related health inequalities in the first year of the pandemic.Methods Natsal-COVID Wave 2 surveyed 6,658 adults aged 18–59 between March–April 2021, using quotas and weighting to achieve quasi-representativeness. Our analysis included sexually active participants aged 18–44, described as female at birth. We analysed contraception use and switching, contraceptive service access, and pregnancy plannedness in the year from March 2020.Findings Amongst all participants (n=1,488), 14.3% (12.5%-16.3%) reported switching or stopping contraception due to the pandemic. Of participants at risk of unplanned pregnancy (n=1,169), 54.1% (51.0%-57.1%) reported routinely using effective contraception in the past year. 3.2% (2.0%-5.1%) of those using effective methods pre-pandemic switched to less effective methods, while 3.8% (2.5%-5.9%) stopped. Stopping/switching was more likely amongst participants of younger age, non-white ethnicity, and lower social grade. 29.3% of at-risk participants (26.9%-31.8%) reported trying to access contraceptive services; of whom 16.4% (13.0%-20.4%) reported their needs went unmet. Unmet need was associated with younger age, diverse sexual identities and anxiety symptoms. Of 199 pregnancies, 6.6% (3.9%-11.1%) were scored as ‘unplanned’; less planning was associated with younger age, lower social grade and unemployment.Interpretation Although many participants reported accessing contraceptive services during the pandemic, one-in-six of these reported an unmet need. Inequalities in unmet need and risk of unplanned pregnancy – related to age, ethnicity, social disadvantage and mental health – potentially exacerbated existing reproductive health inequalities. These should be addressed in the post-pandemic period and beyond.Funding Wellcome Trust, The Economic and Social Research Council, The National Institute for Health Research, Medical Research Council/Chief Scientist Office Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, and UCL Coronavirus Response Fund.What is already known on this topicThe COVID-19 pandemic likely impacted reproductive outcomes in diverse ways; such impacts may have been unequally distributed.Previous studies reported adaptations to health service delivery and difficulties experienced in accessing reproductive health services, with switching and stopping of contraceptive methods and potentially greater risk of unplanned pregnancy.What this study addsWe examined differences in contraceptive use and pregnancy planning in a sample of women, trans and non-binary people able to become pregnant who were quasi-representative of the British general population.We found that key markers of inequality and vulnerability, related to age, ethnicity, social disadvantage and mental health, were associated with increased contraceptive method switching, unmet need of contraceptive services and less-planned pregnancies.How this study might affect research, practice or policyOngoing efforts to ease the health impacts of the pandemic should aim to improve equality of access to contraceptive services.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThe study was funded by the Wellcome Trust, The Economic and Social Research Council, The National Institute for Health Research, Medical Research Council/Chief Scientist Office Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, and UCL Coronavirus Response Fund.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Ethics committee of University of Glasgow gave ethical approval for this work. Ethics committee of London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine gave ethical approval for this work.I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAll data produced will be made available online at https://www.natsal.ac.uk/resources/accessing-data (undergoing preparation at time of preprint) https://www.natsal.ac.uk/resources/accessing-data