You are not currently logged in.
Access JSTOR through your library or other institution:
If You Use a Screen ReaderThis content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Medical Care Cost Savings from Adolescent Contraceptive Use
James Trussell, Jacqueline Koenig, Felicia Stewart and Jacqueline E. Darroch
Family Planning Perspectives
Vol. 29, No. 6 (Nov. - Dec., 1997), pp. 248-255+295
Published by: Guttmacher Institute
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2953412
Page Count: 9
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Preview not available
An analysis of the economic benefits of adolescent contraceptive use utilizes information from a national private payer database and from the California Medicaid program to compare private- and public-sector costs and savings. The study estimates the costs of acquiring and using 11 contraceptive methods appropriate for adolescents, treating associated side effects, providing medical care related to an unintended pregnancy during method use and treating sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) and compares them with the costs of using no method. The average annual cost per adolescent at risk of unintended pregnancy who uses no method is $1,267 ($1,079 for unintended pregnancy and $188 for STDs) in the private sector and $677 ($541 for unintended pregnancy and $137 for STDs) in the public sector under the most conservative assumptions. At one year of use, private-sector savings from adolescent contraceptive use range from $308 for the implant to $946 for the male condom; public-sector savings rise from $60 for the implant to $525 for the male condom. Both the use of male condoms with another method and the advance provision of backup emergency contraceptive pills provide additional savings.
Family Planning Perspectives © 1997 Guttmacher Institute