The myth of menstruation: how menstrual regulation and suppression impact contraceptive choice

Abstract

BackgroundWomen in the US have access to various hormonal contraceptive methods that can regulate menstruation. This study examined the attitudes and perceptions of reproductive-aged women toward contraceptive methods, including how menstrual regulation and suppression preferences influenced contraceptive choice.MethodsData collection used a mixed-methods approach, including 6 focus groups (n\u2009=\u200961), individual interviews (n\u2009=\u200918), and a web-based survey (n\u2009=\u2009547).ResultsParticipants described contraceptive method preferences that allowed monthly bleeding and daily control, expressing concerns about long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) because of decreased user involvement. Some participants noted LARC improved their menstrual control. Many participants felt menstruation was healthy, whereas suppression was abnormal and resulted in negative health outcomes. Though participants indicated LARC as beneficial (M\u2009=\u20094.99\u2009±\u20091.66), convenient (M\u2009=\u20095.43\u2009±\u20091.68), and healthy (M\u2009=\u20094.62\u2009±\u20091.69), they chose combined oral contraceptives due to convenience.ConclusionsFindings suggest women need more information about menstrual regulation and suppression before selecting a contraceptive method, specifically in relation to LARC versus combined oral contraception. Framing menstrual suppression as healthy and natural may improve perceptions of long-term health consequences related to LARC. Providers should discuss menstrual suppression safety to ensure selection of contraceptive options aligning with women’s preferences and needs.