Back to Annual Meeting

Back to Annual Meeting

APHA Scientific Session and Event Listing

John S. Santelli, MD¹, Laura Lindberg, Ph D², Lawrence B. Finer, PhD², Vaughn I. Rickert, PsyD³, Shelly Makleff, MPH⁴, Kathryn Kost, PhD², and Susheela Singh, PhD⁵. (1) Department of Population and Family Health, Columbia University, 60 Haven Ave. #B2, New York, NY 10032, 212-304-5200, js2637@columbia.edu, (2) Guttmacher Institute, 120 Wall Street, New York, NY 10005, (3) Heilbrunn Department of Population and Family Health, Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, 60 Haven Ave, B-3, New York, NY 10032, (4) Evaluation, IPPF/WHR, 120 Wall St. 9th floor, New York, NY 10005, (5) The Guttmacher Institute, 120 Wall Street, New York, NY 10005

Background: The 2002 Behavioral Risk Factors Surveillance Survey (BRFSS), a telephone survey, provides the first available state-based population estimates for contraceptive use. This analysis assesses the reliability of contraceptive use estimates obtained from the 2002 BRFSS, using the 2002 National Survey of Family Growth, the standard national surveillance system in the U.S., as a benchmark. Method: We compared national estimates for most effective current contraceptive method and reasons for nonuse among adult women. Results: The composition of the BRFSS sample is systematically of higher socio-economic status, presumably because poor women without currently functioning telephones are excluded. The BRFSS sample included fewer women without a high school diploma and fewer women with an household income less than $15,000 per year. Estimates for contraceptive use were similar in the NSFG and BRFSS for female sterilization (14.7% BRFSS and 15.4% NSFG), condom (9.3% and 11.8%), injectables (3.2% and 3.4%), IUD (1.4% and 1.4%), and Norplant (0.3% and 0.3%). There were statistically significant, although substantively small, differences in the estimates of current use of vasectomy (7.6% and 6.3%), the pill (21.7% and 19.6%), rhythm (1.5% and 1.0%), diaphragm (0.5% and 0.2%), and withdrawal (0.3% and 2.7%). The major reasons for non-use were similar: seeking pregnancy (4.0% BRFSS and 4.5% NSFG), currently pregnant (5.1% and 4.6%), and hysterectomy (6.1% and 4.6%). Conclusions: The BRFFSS is a useful source of population-based data on contraceptive use for reproductive health program planning; however, planners should be cognizant that the poorest women are not fully represented in telephone surveys.

Learning Objectives: