Cross-sectional survey reveals gaps in contraceptive knowledge and practices among psychology students, highlighting need for better person-centered counseling.
Background In recent years, hormonal contraceptive use has declined in Germany, yet little is known about the contraceptive needs and preferences of its population. This study addresses this gap by (1) identifying attitudes, subjective knowledge, and information needs of psychology students regarding contraceptive methods, (2) evaluating person-centeredness (PC) and shared decision-making (SDM) in contraceptive counseling, and (3) comparing users of hormonal and non-hormonal methods regarding attitudes, knowledge, and age. Methods This cross-sectional study was conducted via an online survey among psychology students in Germany who were biologically capable of becoming pregnant. PC in counseling was assessed using the Person-Centered Contraceptive Counseling Scale (PCCC), while SDM was measured using the CollaboRATE questionnaire and Control Preference Scale. Attitudes, knowledge, and information needs were evaluated through adapted or self-developed items. The PCCC was translated and adapted using a team translation protocol (TRAPD). Results Of 126 participants, 82.6% used at least one contraceptive method, mainly condoms (43.8%) and the combined pill (19.8%). Hormonal users were younger (M=22.84) than non-hormonal users (M=25.40). Attitudes toward hormonal contraception were generally negative. Participants reported good or basic knowledge of 9 out of 15 methods; non-hormonal users knew more methods than hormonal users. Gynecologists (36.7%) were the most frequent information source. About 35.7% had received contraceptive counseling in the previous year but reported low satisfaction with the information provided. Overall, PC and SDM were only partially implemented in contraceptive counseling. Conclusion Findings highlight the need for more person-centered counseling to support informed decisions. The results can inform interventions aimed at improving contraceptive knowledge among users and enhancing PC and SDM practices among gynecologists.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lindig et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: