Knowledge matters – Impact of two types of information brochure on contraceptive knowledge, attitudes and intentions

ABSTRACT

Objective To compare the effect of two types of counselling brochure on knowledge, attitudes and intention towards combined oral contraceptives (COCs).

Study design Double-blind, parallel-group randomised trial conducted in Germany. Nulliparous women aged 18–24 years were randomly assigned to receive one of two comprehensive information brochures about COCs, their benefits and risks, and alternative contraceptive methods. The first brochure was based on standard recommendations for evidence-based patient information (EBPI). This was restructured and adapted according to the mental models approach (MMA) for the second brochure. The primary endpoint was the change in number of correct answers in a knowledge questionnaire administered directly after the intervention and three months later. The impact on attitudes and intention were secondary outcomes.

Results Before the intervention, women answered 18.9 (standard deviation [SD] 4.2) of 39 knowledge items correctly. After the intervention, the EBPI group (n = 66; p = not significant) improved by 7.6 (SD 5.4) correct answers compared to 8.3 (SD 5.8) in the MMA group (n = 66). After three months, the MMA group (n = 60) maintained an improvement (5.0 [SD 4.8] correct answers vs. pre-intervention measurement). In the EPBI group (n = 64), this value was 3.9 (SD 5.6). The change in correct answers was positively correlated with a change in attitude (r = 0.284, p = 0.001) and intention (r = 0.212, p = 0.015).

Conclusions The use of detailed evidence-based information brochures – irrespective of the underlying risk communication approach – can be recommended.

KEYWORDS:

• Combined oral contraceptives
• Knowledge
• Information brochures
• Evidence-based patient information
• Mental models approach
• Randomised controlled trial

Acknowledgements

Funding for this study was provided by Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals (Berlin, Germany). The authors would like to thank Claire Byrne of inScience Communications, a Wolters Kluwer business, for undertaking a language edit of the manuscript. This work was funded by Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals.

Declaration of interest: Claudia Vogt is a doctoral student at Charité University Medicine Berlin and part-time employee of Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals, Berlin, Germany. Marion Schaefer reports no conflict of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and the writing of the paper.