TABLE 3.

Interventions Achieving Statistically Significant Impact on Rapid Repeat Pregnancy or Birth Among High-Quality Evaluations (n=14)

Intervention DescriptionEvaluationCountryOutcome Measured During Postpartum PeriodRepeat Pregnancy or Birth RateP Value
InterventionControl
Contraceptive Services and Information
Proactive monitoring of contraceptive use, contraceptive education, and inclusion of partner and familiesSullivan 199218USPregnancy <18 months12%28%<.003
Proactive monitoring of contraceptive use, contraceptive education, and inclusion of partner and familiesRabin 199136USPregnancy over 9 years9%70%<.001
Postpartum Contraceptive Services
Postpartum check-ups and provision of contraceptive services within 2 months of index birth in school settingSeitz 199333USBirth <24 months12%36%<.005
Education on the use of LAM and, for intervention group participants only, education on the use of EC in the event of unprotected intercourse and provision of take-home supply of ECShaaban 201322EgyptPregnancy <6 months0.3%a5%<.001
Education on the use of LAM and support/increased messaging to transition to another modern method by 6 months postpartum (a sub-intervention of a larger birth spacing intervention evaluated by Ahmed 201539)Ahmed 201539BangladeshBirth <24 months14%b17%b<.01
Planning Interventions
Preparation of contraceptive plan in the antenatal period (a sub-intervention of a larger pregnancy spacing intervention evaluated by Olds 200224)Gray 2006 study17 (secondary analysis of Olds 200224)USPregnancy 13–24 monthsccc
Home visitation by nurses to help women plan the timing of the next pregnancy, rather than avoid unintended pregnanciesOlds 200224USPregnancy <24 months29%41%<.02
Home visitation by nurses to help women plan the timing of the next pregnancy, rather than avoid unintended pregnanciesKitzman 199725USPregnancy <24 months36%47%<.01
Training adolescents in “if-then” planning for oral contraceptive useMartin 201121UKPregnancy <24 months7%12%<.02
Community-Based Social and Behavioral Change Communication
Education on postpartum fertility return before return of menses. This was a sub-intervention of birth spacing intervention evaluated by Ahmed 2015.Cooper 2014 study16 (analysis of sub-intervention carried out in Ahmed 201539)BangladeshBirth <24 months14%d17%<.01
Interpersonal counseling and community education on the benefits of healthy pregnancy spacing and potential consequences of short pregnancy intervals, with a focus on adolescents and young adults ages 15–24Sebastian 201237IndiaPregnancy at 9 months10.5%e16.4%<.01
Group discussions in homes of influentials to promote positive views of contraceptives and encourage discussions with husbands and friendsKincaid 200057BangladeshContraceptive continuation over 2.5 yearsfff
Motivating, Mentoring, and Goal Setting
Assistance to adolescents to prepare plans for achieving short- and long-term life goals (a sub-intervention of a larger pregnancy spacing intervention evaluated by Olds 200224)Gray 2006 study17 (secondary analysis of Olds 200224)USPregnancy 7–12 monthsccc
Use of mentorship curriculum by women from the community who made home visits to postpartum adolescents every 2 weeks until infant's first birthdayBlack 200619USBirth <24 months11%24%<.05
Cell phone counseling emphasizing teens' own goals and needs, positive youth assets, healthy relationships, and positive reproductive health practicesKatz 201123USPregnancy <24 months26%g39%g<.01
Motivational interviewing of adolescents, emphasizing personal goals and self-efficacyBarnet 200920USBirth <24 monthshhh
Provision of skills training and job placement for adolescent mothers over age 16 and educational support for mothers under age 16Drayton 200040JamaicaPregnancy over 4 years37%60%<.05
  • Abbreviations: EC, emergency contraception; LAM, Lactational Amenorrhea Method.

  • a Shaaban 2013 reported 2 pregnancies among 579 participants in the intervention group, for a pregnancy rate of 0.3%. The article reported a pregnancy rate of 0.8%, but it is likely a transcription error.

  • b At 3 months postpartum, contraceptive use was 36% (of which 23% was LAM use) in the intervention group compared with 11% (with no LAM use) in the comparison group. In the intervention group, in part due to LAM users' transition to another method at 6 months postpartum, contraceptive use remained significantly higher in the intervention group than the comparison group at 24 months postpartum (46% vs. 35%, respectively; P<.001).

  • c The study indicated that adolescents with a prenatal contraceptive plan were significantly less likely to conceive at 13–24 months postpartum than adolescents without a plan. 18.6% of adolescents who prepared such a plan did not conceive by 13-24 months, while 0% of those who conceived by 13-24 months had prepared a prenatal contraceptive plan (P<.005). Adolescents who formulated short- and long-term goals were significantly less likely to conceive at 7–12 months postpartum than those who did not formulate such goals (P<.05).

  • d Sub-intervention analyzed in Cooper 201416 focused on improving knowledge of postpartum fertility return. The analysis found that 98% of women knew fertility could return before return of menses, and women stated this information motivated them to begin using contraceptives.

  • e 93% of those in the intervention group reported counseling on use of spacing methods after delivery, whereas 69% of those in the control group reported such counseling (P<.01). Women in the intervention group who knew at least 2 spacing messages and at least 2 spacing methods were more likely to adopt a modern method postpartum (P<.05).

  • f Outcome measured was contraceptive continuation for 2.5 years at any point in a woman's life, not necessarily during the postpartum period. In the intervention group, contraceptive continuation for 2.5 years was 43.9% vs. 25.5% in the comparison group (P<.001).

  • g Among adolescents ages 15–17 years.

  • h Controlling for baseline difference, adolescents who received motivational interviews and home visits were more likely to defer a repeat birth than those in the control group (hazards ratio, 0.4; P<.05).