HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Purchase Article View Shopping Cart Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Related articles in AJPH Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Trussell, J Articles by Wysocki, S Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Trussell, J Articles by Wysocki, S

The economic value of contraception: a comparison of 15 methods.

J Trussell, J A Leveque, J D Koenig, R London, S Borden, J Henneberry, K D LaGuardia, F Stewart, T G Wilson and S Wysocki

Office of Population Research, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Princeton University, NJ 08544, USA.

OBJECTIVES. The purpose of the study was to determine the clinical and economic impact of alternative contraceptive methods. METHODS. Direct medical costs (method use, side effects, and unintended pregnancies) associated with 15 contraceptive methods were modeled from the perspectives of a private payer and a publicly funded program. Cost data were drawn from a national claims database and MediCal. The main outcome measures included 1-year and 5-year costs and number of pregnancies avoided compared with use of no contraceptive method. RESULTS. All 15 contraceptives were more effective and less costly than no method. Over 5 years, the copper-T IUD, vasectomy, the contraceptive implant, and the injectable contraceptive were the most cost-effective, saving $14,122, $13,899, $13,813, and $13,373, respectively, and preventing approximately the same number of pregnancies (4.2) per person. Because of their high failure rates, barrier methods, spermicides, withdrawal, and periodic abstinence were costly but still saved from $8933 to $12,239 over 5 years. Oral contraceptives fell between these groups, costing $1784 over 5 years, saving $12,879, and preventing 4.1 pregnancies. CONCLUSIONS. Contraceptives save health care resources by preventing unintended pregnancies. Up-front acquisition costs are inaccurate predictors of the total economic costs of competing contraceptive methods.

Related articles in AJPH:

Failing to prevent unintended pregnancy is costly.

P R Lee and F H Stewart
AJPH 1995 85: 479-480. [PDF]  

This article has been cited by other articles:

				I. Mavranezouli and on behalf of the LARC Guideline Development Group The cost-effectiveness of long-acting reversible contraceptive methods in the UK: analysis based on a decision-analytic model developed for a National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) clinical practice guideline Hum. Reprod., June 1, 2008; 23(6): 1338 - 1345. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				N. L. Stanwood and K. A. Bradley Young Pregnant Women's Knowledge of Modern Intrauterine Devices Obstet. Gynecol., December 1, 2006; 108(6): 1417 - 1422. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. Hubacher, V. Reyes, S. Lillo, B. Pierre-Louis, A. Zepeda, P.-L. Chen, and H. Croxatto Preventing copper intrauterine device removals due to side effects among first-time users: randomized trial to study the effect of prophylactic ibuprofen Hum. Reprod., June 1, 2006; 21(6): 1467 - 1472. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Kurth, M. Weaver, D. Lockhart, and L. Bielinski The Benefit of Health Insurance Coverage of Contraceptives in a Population-Based Sample Am J Public Health, August 1, 2004; 94(8): 1330 - 1332. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. G. Foster, C. M. Klaisle, M. Blum, M. E. Bradsberry, C. D. Brindis, and F. H. Stewart Expanded State-Funded Family Planning Services: Estimating Pregnancies Averted by the Family PACT Program in California, 1997-1998 Am J Public Health, August 1, 2004; 94(8): 1341 - 1346. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. K. Naughton, J. Myles, and A. J. Thomas Jr. The Use of URYX for Reversible Vasectomy in a Rabbit Model J Androl, July 1, 2004; 25(4): 545 - 553. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. B. Braunstein, J. Hausfeld, J. Hausfeld, and A. London Economics of Reducing Menstruation With Trimonthly-Cycle Oral Contraceptive Therapy: Comparison With Standard-Cycle Regimens Obstet. Gynecol., October 1, 2003; 102(4): 699 - 708. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Townsend-Rocchiccioli and D. George An Analysis of Proposed Federal and Louisiana Policy Regarding Contraceptive Prescription Pill Bills as Equity Issues Policy Politics Nursing Practice, August 1, 2003; 4(3): 196 - 202. [Abstract] [PDF]

				T. Raine, C. Harper, M. Paukku, and P. Darney Race, Adolescent Contraceptive Choice, and Pregnancy at Presentation to a Family Planning Clinic Obstet. Gynecol., February 1, 2002; 99(2): 241 - 247. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. D. Marciante, J. S. Gardner, D. L. Veenstra, and S. D. Sullivan Modeling the Cost and Outcomes of Pharmacist-Prescribed Emergency Contraception Am J Public Health, September 1, 2001; 91(9): 1443 - 1445. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. Hubacher, R. Lara-Ricalde, D. J. Taylor, F. Guerra-Infante, and R. Guzman-Rodriguez Use of Copper Intrauterine Devices and the Risk of Tubal Infertility among Nulligravid Women N. Engl. J. Med., August 23, 2001; 345(8): 561 - 567. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. B. Peterson A 40-Year-Old Woman Considering Contraception JAMA, May 27, 1998; 279(20): 1651 - 1658. [Full Text] [PDF]

				Long-Acting Contraceptives: Save, Effective, and Convenient Journal Watch Women's Health, May 1, 1998; 1998(501): 23 - 23. [Full Text]

				S. P. Sarma, K. Garafalo, and W. L. Graves Use of the Intrauterine Device by Inner-city Women Arch Fam Med, March 1, 1998; 7(2): 130 - 133. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]