Long-Acting Reversible Contraception for Adolescents: A Review of Practices to Support Better Communication, Counseling, and Adherence

References

• Committee on Adolescent Health Care, Long-Acting Reversible Contraception Work Group. ACOG committee opinion no. 735: adolescents and long-acting reversible contraception: implants and intrauterine devices. Obstet Gynecol. 2018;131(5):e130–e139. DOI:10.1097/aog.0000000000002632
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braverman PK, Adelman WP, Alderman EM, et al.; Committee on Adolescence. Contraception for Adolescents. Pediatrics. 2014;134(4):e1244–e1256. doi:10.1542/peds.2014-2299
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lindberg LD, Santelli J, Desai S. Understanding the decline in adolescent fertility in the United States, 2007–2012. J Adolesc Health. 2016;59(5):577–583. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2016.06.024
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martinez GM, Abma JC. Sexual activity and contraceptive use among teenagers aged 15–19 in the United States, 2015–2017. NCHS Data Brief. 2020;2020(366):1–8.
   Google Scholar
• Szucs L, Lowry R, Fasula A, et al. Condom and contraceptive use among sexually active high school students — youth risk behavior survey, United States, 2019. MMWR Supplements. 2020;69:11–18. doi:10.15585/mmwr.su6901a2
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pritt NM, Norris AH, Berlan ED. Barriers and facilitators to adolescents’ use of long-acting reversible contraceptives. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2017;30(1):18–22. doi:10.1016/j.jpag.2016.07.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roderique-Davies G, McKnight C, Jonn B, Faulkner S, Lancastle D. Models of health behaviour predict intention to use long acting reversible contraception use. Womens Health. 2016;12(6):507–512. doi:10.1177/1745505716678231
   Google Scholar
• Higgins JA. Celebration meets caution: LARC’s boons, potential busts, and the benefits of a reproductive justice approach. Contraception. 2014;89(4):237–241. doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2014.01.027
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Russo JA, Miller E, Gold MA. Myths and misconceptions about long-acting reversible contraception (LARC). J Adolesc Health. 2013;52(4 Suppl):S14–S21. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2013.02.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobs Institute of Women’s Health. History of Long-Acting Reversible Contraception (LARC) in the United States; 2016. Available from: https://publichealth.gwu.edu/sites/default/files/downloads/projects/JIWH/LARC_History.pdf. Accessed January 2, 2023.
   Google Scholar
• Piccinino LJ, Mosher WD. Trends in contraceptive use in the United States: 1982-1995. Fam Plann Perspect. 1998;30(1):4–10, 46. doi:10.2307/2991517
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc. Highlights of Prescribing Information, Mirena (levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system); 2022. Available from: https://labeling.bayerhealthcare.com/html/products/pi/Mirena_PI.pdf. Accessed January 2, 2023.
   Google Scholar
• McNicholas C, Maddipati R, Zhao Q, Swor E, Peipert JF. Use of the etonogestrel implant and levonorgestrel intrauterine device beyond the U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved duration. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;125(3):599–604. doi:10.1097/aog.0000000000000690
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaiser Family Foundation. Intrauterine devices (IUDs): access for women in the U.S. Available from: https://www.kff.org/womens-health-policy/fact-sheet/intrauterine-devices-iuds-access-for-women-in-The-u-s. Accessed January 2, 2023.
   Google Scholar
• AbbVie. Highlights of Prescribing Information, Liletta (levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system); 2019. https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2019/206229s008lbl.pdf. Accessed January 2, 2023.
   Google Scholar
• Foran T, Butcher BE, Kovacs G, Bateson D, O’Connor V. Safety of insertion of the copper IUD and LNG-IUS in nulliparous women: a systematic review. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2018;23(5):379–386. doi:10.1080/13625187.2018.1526898
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buhling KJ, Zite NB, Lotke P, Black K. Worldwide use of intrauterine contraception: a review. Contraception. 2014;89(3):162–173. doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2013.11.011
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Danna K, Jaworski G, Rahaivondrafahitra B, et al. Introducing the hormonal intrauterine device in Madagascar, Nigeria, and Zambia: results from a pilot study. Reprod Health. 2022;19(1):4. doi:10.1186/s12978-021-01300-x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Menon S, Alderman EM, Chung RJ. Committee on adolescence. long-acting reversible contraception: specific issues for adolescents. Pediatrics. 2020;146(2):e2020007252. doi:10.1542/peds.2020-007252
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kumar MM. Long-acting reversible contraceptives for adolescents: more complex than “first-line”. JAMA Pediatr. 2018;172(1):6–7. doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2017.3520
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fuchs R, Taylor D, Jenkins DW, et al. Levonorgestrel release rates measured through analysis of two-rod contraceptive explants. Contracept X. 2020;2:100039. doi:10.1016/j.conx.2020.100039
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Trussell J. Contraceptive failure in the United States. Contraception. 2011;83(5):397–404. doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2011.01.021
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ortiz ME, Croxatto HB. Copper-T intrauterine device and levonorgestrel intrauterine system: biological bases of their mechanism of action. Contraception. 2007;75(6 Suppl):S16–S30. doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2007.01.020
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Apter D, Gemzell-Danielsson K, Hauck B, Rosen K, Zurth C. Pharmacokinetics of two low-dose levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine systems and effects on ovulation rate and cervical function: pooled analyses of Phase II and III studies. Fertil Steril. 2014;101(6):1656–62.e1–e4. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.03.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Francis JKR, Gold MA. Long-acting reversible contraception for adolescents: a review. JAMA Pediatr. 2017;171(7):694–701. doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2017.0598
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hall KS, Steinberg JR, Cwiak CA, Allen RH, Marcus SM. Contraception and mental health: a commentary on the evidence and principles for practice. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;212(6):740–746. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2014.12.010
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reproductive Health Access Project. Quick start algorithm for hormonal contraception. Available from: https://www.reproductiveaccess.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/QuickstartAlgorithm.pdf. Accessed January 15, 2023.
   Google Scholar
• Harper CC, Speidel JJ, Drey EA, Trussell J, Blum M, Darney PD. Copper intrauterine device for emergency contraception: clinical practice among contraceptive providers. Obstet Gynecol. 2012;119(2 Pt 1):220–226. doi:10.1097/AOG.0b013e3182429e0d
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turok DK, Gero A, Simmons RG, et al. Levonorgestrel vs. copper intrauterine devices for emergency contraception. N Engl J Med. 2021;384(4):335–344. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2022141
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Curtis KM, Tepper NK, Jatlaoui TC, et al. U.S. medical eligibility criteria for contraceptive use, 2016. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2016;65(3):1–103. doi:10.15585/mmwr.rr6503a1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osterman M, Hamilton B, Martin JA, Driscoll AK, Valenzuela CP. Births: final Data for 2020. Natl Vital Stat Rep. 2021;70(17):1–50.
   Google Scholar
• Lindberg LD, Firestein L, Beavin C. Trends in U.S. adolescent sexual behavior and contraceptive use, 2006–2019. Contracept X. 2021;3:100064. doi:10.1016/j.conx.2021.100064
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Daniels K, Abma JC. Current contraceptive status among women aged 15–49: United States, 2017–2019. NCHS Data Brief. 2020;388:1–8.
   Google Scholar
• Lindberg LD, Scott RH, Desai S, Pleasure ZH. Comparability of estimates and trends in adolescent sexual and contraceptive behaviors from two national surveys: National Survey of Family Growth and the Youth Risk Behavior Survey. PLoS One. 2021;16(7):e0253262. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0253262
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Reproductive health: teen pregnancy - birth rates for females aged 15 to 19 years, by race and Hispanic origin of mother: United States, 2018 and 2019. Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/teenpregnancy/about/index.htm. Accessed December 10, 2022.
   Google Scholar
• Chandra-Mouli V, McCarraher DR, Phillips SJ, Williamson NE, Hainsworth G. Contraception for adolescents in low and middle income countries: needs, barriers, and access. Reprod Health. 2014;11(1):1. doi:10.1186/1742-4755-11-1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs. Contraceptive use by method 2019 - data booklet; 2019. Available from: https://www.un.org/development/desa/pd/sites/www.un.org.development.desa.pd/files/files/documents/2020/Jan/un_2019_contraceptiveusebymethod_databooklet.pdf. Accessed Jan 15, 2023.
   Google Scholar
• Jacobstein R. Liftoff: the blossoming of contraceptive implant use in Africa. Glob Health Sci Pract. 2018;6(1):17–39. doi:10.9745/ghsp-d-17-00396
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hendrick CE, Cone JN, Cirullo J, Maslowsky J. Determinants of Long-acting Reversible Contraception (LARC) initial and continued use among adolescents in the United States. Adolesc Res Rev. 2020;5(3):243–279. doi:10.1007/s40894-019-00126-w
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Skinner CS, Tiro J, Champion VL. The health belief model. In: Health Behavior: Theory, Research, and Practice. 5th ed. Jossey-Bass/Wiley; 2015:75–94.
   Google Scholar
• Lopez LM, Grey TW, Chen M, Tolley EE, Stockton LL. Theory-based interventions for contraception. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;11(11):Cd007249. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD007249.pub5
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Stokholm Baekgaard R, Gjaerevold Damhaugh E, Mrema D, Rasch V, Khan K, Linde DS. Training of healthcare providers and use of long-acting reversible contraception in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2021;100(4):619–628. doi:10.1111/aogs.14127
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bolarinwa OA, Afaya A, Ajayi KV, Ojo A, Alawode OA. Prevalence and factors associated with the use of long-acting reversible and permanent contraceptive methods among women who desire no more children in high fertility countries in sub-saharan Africa. BMC Public Health. 2022;22(1):2141. doi:10.1186/s12889-022-14575-x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Apanga PA, Kumbeni MT, Ayamga EA, Ulanja MB, Akparibo R. Prevalence and factors associated with modern contraceptive use among women of reproductive age in 20 African countries: a large population-based study. BMJ Open. 2020;10(9):e041103. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2020-041103
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kungu W, Khasakhala A, Agwanda A. Use of long-acting reversible contraception among adolescents and young women in Kenya. PLoS One. 2020;15(11):e0241506. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0241506
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ngo TD, Nuccio O, Pereira SK, Footman K, Reiss K. Evaluating a LARC expansion program in 14 Sub-Saharan African Countries: a service delivery model for meeting FP2020 goals. Matern Child Health J. 2017;21(9):1734–1743. doi:10.1007/s10995-016-2014-0
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ti A, Soin K, Rahman T, Dam A, Yeh PT. Contraceptive values and preferences of adolescents and young adults: a systematic review. Contraception. 2021. doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2021.05.018
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoopes AJ, Teal SB, Akers AY, Sheeder J. Low acceptability of certain contraceptive methods among young women. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2018;31(3):274–280. doi:10.1016/j.jpag.2017.11.008
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen R, Sheeder J, Kane M, Teal SB. Factors associated with contraceptive method choice and initiation in adolescents and young women. J Adolesc Health. 2017;61(4):454–460. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2017.04.008
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Secura GM, Allsworth JE, Madden T, Mullersman JL, Peipert JF. The Contraceptive CHOICE Project: reducing barriers to long-acting reversible contraception. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010;203(2):115.e1–115.e7. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2010.04.017
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mestad R, Secura G, Allsworth JE, Madden T, Zhao Q, Peipert JF. Acceptance of long-acting reversible contraceptive methods by adolescent participants in the Contraceptive CHOICE Project. Contraception. 2011;84(5):493–498. doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2011.03.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Callahan DG, Garabedian LF, Harney KF, DiVasta AD. Will it hurt? The intrauterine device insertion experience and long-term acceptability among adolescents and young women. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2019;32(6):615–621. doi:10.1016/j.jpag.2019.08.004
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whiteman MK, Tyler CP, Folger SG, Gaffield ME, Curtis KM. When can a woman have an intrauterine device inserted? A systematic review. Contraception. 2013;87(5):666–673. doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2012.08.015
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Teal SB, Romer SE, Goldthwaite LM, Peters MG, Kaplan DW, Sheeder J. Insertion characteristics of intrauterine devices in adolescents and young women: success, ancillary measures, and complications. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;213(4):515.e1–5. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2015.06.049
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Friedman JO. Factors associated with contraceptive satisfaction in adolescent women using the IUD. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2015;28(1):38–42. doi:10.1016/j.jpag.2014.02.015
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maguire K, Davis A, Rosario Tejeda L, Westhoff C. Intracervical lidocaine gel for intrauterine device insertion: a randomized controlled trial. Contraception. 2012;86(3):214–219. doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2012.01.005
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lopez LM, Bernholc A, Zeng Y, et al. Interventions for pain with intrauterine device insertion. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;2015(7):Cd007373. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD007373.pub3
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Higgins JA, Sanders JN, Palta M, Turok DK. Women’s sexual function, satisfaction, and perceptions after starting long-acting reversible contraceptives. Obstet Gynecol. 2016;128(5):1143–1151. doi:10.1097/aog.0000000000001655
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harris K, Byrd K, Engel M, Weeks K, Ahlers-Schmidt CR. Internet-based information on long-acting reversible contraception for adolescents. J Prim Care Community Health. 2016;7(2):76–80. doi:10.1177/2150131915621058
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rubin SE, Felsher M, Korich F, Jacobs AM. Urban adolescents’ and young adults’ decision-making process around selection of intrauterine contraception. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2016;29(3):234–239. doi:10.1016/j.jpag.2015.09.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown BP, Chor J, Hebert LE, Webb ME, Whitaker AK. Shared negative experiences of long-acting reversible contraception and their influence on contraceptive decision-making: a multi-methods study. Contraception. 2019;99(4):228–232. doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2019.01.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Rourke-Suchoff DK, Arora KS, Hildebrand VM, Singer ME. Exploring maternal attitudes towards adolescent contraception: implications for use of LARC. Int J Adolesc Med Health. 2017;30(6). doi:10.1515/ijamh-2016-0120
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Higgins JA, Kramer RD, Ryder KM. Provider bias in Long-Acting Reversible Contraception (LARC) promotion and removal: perceptions of young adult women. Am J Public Health. 2016;106(11):1932–1937. doi:10.2105/ajph.2016.303393
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenstock JR, Peipert JF, Madden T, Zhao Q, Secura GM. Continuation of reversible contraception in teenagers and young women. Obstet Gynecol. 2012;120(6):1298–1305. doi:10.1097/aog.0b013e31827499bd
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Usinger KM, Gola SB, Weis M, Smaldone A. Intrauterine contraception continuation in adolescents and young women: a systematic review. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2016;29(6):659–667. doi:10.1016/j.jpag.2016.06.007
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Howard DL, Wayman R, Strickland JL. Satisfaction with and intention to continue depo-provera versus the mirena IUD among post-partum adolescents through 12 months of follow-up. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2013;26(6):358–365. doi:10.1016/j.jpag.2013.07.013
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists’ Committee on Obstetric Practice. Committee opinion no. 670: immediate postpartum long-acting reversible contraception. Obstet Gynecol. 2016;128(2):e32–e37. DOI:10.1097/aog.0000000000001587
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Averbach SH, Ermias Y, Jeng G, et al. Expulsion of intrauterine devices after postpartum placement by timing of placement, delivery type, and intrauterine device type: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2020;223(2):177–188. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2020.02.045
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sothornwit J, Werawatakul Y, Kaewrudee S, Lumbiganon P, Laopaiboon M. Immediate versus delayed postpartum insertion of contraceptive implant for contraception. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;4(4):Cd011913. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD011913.pub2
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bryant AG, Bauer AE, Stuart GS, et al. Etonogestrel-releasing contraceptive implant for postpartum adolescents: a randomized controlled trial. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2017;30(3):389–394. doi:10.1016/j.jpag.2016.08.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rose SB, Garrett SM. Postabortion initiation of long-acting reversible contraception by adolescent and nulliparous women in New Zealand. J Adolesc Health. 2016;58(2):160–166. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2015.09.025
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buckingham P, Moulton JE, Subasinghe AK, Amos N, Mazza D. Acceptability of immediate postpartum and post-abortion long-acting reversible contraception provision to adolescents: a systematic review. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2021;100(4):629–640. doi:10.1111/aogs.14129
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raymond EG, Weaver MA, Tan YL, et al. Effect of immediate compared with delayed insertion of etonogestrel implants on medical abortion efficacy and repeat pregnancy: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2016;127(2):306–312. doi:10.1097/aog.0000000000001274
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Committee on Practice Bulletins-Gynecology, Long-Acting Reversible Contraception Work Group. Practice bulletin no. 186: long-acting reversible contraception: implants and intrauterine devices. Obstet Gynecol. 2017;130(5):e251–e269. DOI:10.1097/aog.0000000000002400
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fox MC, Oat-Judge J, Severson K, et al. Immediate placement of intrauterine devices after first and second trimester pregnancy termination. Contraception. 2011;83(1):34–40. doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2010.06.018
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Green S, Sheeder J, Richards M. The etonogestrel implant in adolescents: factors associated with removal for bothersome bleeding in the first year after insertion. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2021;34(6):825–831. doi:10.1016/j.jpag.2021.05.011
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Madden T, McNicholas C, Zhao Q, Secura GM, Eisenberg DL, Peipert JF. Association of age and parity with intrauterine device expulsion. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;124(4):718–726. doi:10.1097/aog.0000000000000475
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keenahan L, Bercaw-Pratt JL, Adeyemi O, Hakim J, Sangi-Haghpeykar H, Dietrich JE. Rates of intrauterine device expulsion among adolescents and young women. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2021;34(3):362–365. doi:10.1016/j.jpag.2020.11.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diedrich JT, Klein DA, Peipert JF. Long-acting reversible contraception in adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;216(4):364.e1–364.e12. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2016.12.024
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coles CB, Shubkin CD. Effective, recommended, underutilized: a review of the literature on barriers to adolescent usage of long-acting reversible contraceptive methods. Curr Opin Pediatr. 2018;30(5):683–688. doi:10.1097/mop.0000000000000663
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith AJB, Harney KF, Singh T, Hurwitz AG. Provider and health system factors associated with usage of long-acting reversible contraception in adolescents. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2017;30(6):609–614. doi:10.1016/j.jpag.2017.05.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berlan ED, Pritt NM, Norris AH. Pediatricians’ attitudes and beliefs about long-acting reversible contraceptives influence counseling. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2017;30(1):47–52. doi:10.1016/j.jpag.2016.09.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coates C, Gordon CM, Simpson T. A qualitative study exploring contraceptive practices and barriers to long-acting reversible contraceptive use in a sample of adolescents living in the Southern United States. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2018;31(6):605–609. doi:10.1016/j.jpag.2018.07.006
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Behmer Hansen RT, Arora KS. Consenting to invasive contraceptives: an ethical analysis of adolescent decision-making authority for long-acting reversible contraception. J Med Ethics. 2018;44(9):585–588. doi:10.1136/medethics-2018-104855
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guttmacher Institute. An overview of consent to reproductive health services by young people; 2021. Available from: https://www.guttmacher.org/state-policy/explore/overview-minors-consent-law. Accessed November 1, 2021.
   Google Scholar
• Bergin A, Tristan S, Terplan M, Gilliam ML, Whitaker AK. A missed opportunity for care: two-visit IUD insertion protocols inhibit placement. Contraception. 2012;86(6):694–697. doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2012.05.011
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weisman CS, Chuang CH, Snyder AH, Liu G, Leslie DL. ACA’s contraceptive coverage requirement: measuring use and out-of-pocket spending. Health Aff. 2019;38(9):1537–1541. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.2018.05484
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swan L. Policy impacts on contraceptive access in the United States: a scoping review. J Popul Res. 2023;40. DOI:10.1007/s12546-023-09298-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carlson JL, Goldstein R. Using the electronic health record to conduct adolescent telehealth visits in the time of COVID-19. J Adolesc Health. 2020;67(2):157–158. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2020.05.022
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Society for Adolescent Health and Medicine. American academy of pediatrics. confidentiality protections for adolescents and young adults in the health care billing and insurance claims process. J Adolesc Health. 2016;58(3):374–377. DOI:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2015.12.009
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matsushita T, Hasegawa T, Noma H, Ota E, Chou VB, Okada Y. Interventions to increase access to long‐acting reversible contraceptives. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021;(11). doi:10.1002/14651858.CD014987
   Google Scholar
• Secura GM, Madden T, McNicholas C, et al. Provision of no-cost, long-acting contraception and teenage pregnancy. N Engl J Med. 2014;371(14):1316–1323. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1400506
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Romer SE, Kennedy KI. The Colorado initiative to reduce unintended pregnancy: contraceptive access and impact on reproductive health. Am J Public Health. 2022;112(S5):S532–S536. doi:10.2105/ajph.2022.306891
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Office of Population Affairs, United States Department of Health and Human Services. Teen pregnancy prevention program - grant programs; 2023.
   Google Scholar
• Dehlendorf C, Krajewski C, Borrero S. Contraceptive counseling: best practices to ensure quality communication and enable effective contraceptive use. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2014;57(4):659–673. doi:10.1097/grf.0000000000000059
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kendall-Taylor N, Ginsburg KR. Framing strategies to shape parent and adolescent understandings of development. Pediatrics. 2021;148(3). doi:10.1542/peds.2021-050735
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gomez AM, Fuentes L, Allina A. Women or LARC first? Reproductive autonomy and the promotion of long-acting reversible contraceptive methods. Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2014;46(3):171–175. doi:10.1363/46e1614
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pindar C, Lee SH, Meropol SB, Lazebnik R. The role of reproductive autonomy in adolescent contraceptive choice and acceptance of long-acting reversible contraception. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2020;33(5):494–499. doi:10.1016/j.jpag.2020.06.013
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dehlendorf C, Ruskin R, Grumbach K, et al. Recommendations for intrauterine contraception: a randomized trial of the effects of patients’ race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010;203(4):319.e1–8. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2010.05.009
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. ACOG committee opinion no. 710: counseling adolescents about contraception. Obstet Gynecol. 2017;130(2):e74–e80. DOI:10.1097/aog.0000000000002234
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Patient-centered contraceptive counseling: ACOG committee statement number 1. Obstet Gynecol. 2022;139(2):350–353. DOI:10.1097/aog.0000000000004659
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoopes AJ, Gilmore K, Cady J, Akers AY, Ahrens KR. A qualitative study of factors that influence contraceptive choice among adolescent school-based health center patients. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2016;29(3):259–264. doi:10.1016/j.jpag.2015.09.011
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Widman L, Choukas-Bradley S, Noar SM, Nesi J, Garrett K. Parent-adolescent sexual communication and adolescent safer sex behavior: a meta-analysis. JAMA Pediatr. 2016;170(1):52–61. doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2015.2731
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lantos H, Manlove J, Wildsmith E, Faccio B, Guzman L, Moore KA. Parent-teen communication about sexual and reproductive health: cohort differences by race/ethnicity and nativity. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019;16(5):833. doi:10.3390/ijerph16050833
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flores D, Barroso J. Century parent-child sex communication in the United States: a process review. J Sex Res. 2017;54(4–5):532–548. doi:10.1080/00224499.2016.1267693
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boekeloo BO. Will you ask? Will they tell you? Are you ready to hear and respond?: barriers to physician-adolescent discussion about sexuality. JAMA Pediatr. 2014;168(2):111–113. doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2013.4605
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hillard PJA. Reproductive justice and adolescents in a post-roe United States. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2022;35(6):607–608. doi:10.1016/j.jpag.2022.10.009
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilkinson TA, Kottke MJ, Berlan ED. Providing contraception for young people during a pandemic is essential health care. JAMA Pediatr. 2020;174(9):823–824. doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2020.1884
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gubrium AC, Mann ES, Borrero S, et al. Realizing reproductive health equity needs more than long-acting reversible contraception (LARC). Am J Public Health. 2016;106(1):18–19. doi:10.2105/ajph.2015.302900
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moskowitz E, Jennings B. Directive counseling on long-acting contraception. Am J Public Health. 1996;86(6):787–790. doi:10.2105/ajph.86.6.787
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Women’s Health Network, Sister Song. Long-acting reversible contraception statement of principles; 2017. Available from: https://www.nwhn.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/LARCStatementofPrinciples.pdf. Accessed January 2, 2023.
   Google Scholar