Groundhog Day: ABSTINENCE-ONLY CLASSES MAY BE EFFECTIVE FOR YOUNG TEENS - Other forms of sex education may work too, experts call for more studies(!)

• note the qualifiers: “may” x 2  …and “young” teens.

• Sex-ed and abstinence classes don’t influence the use of condoms or birth control; children remain at risk of pregnancy and disease.

By Thomas H. Maugh II and Shari Roan | LA Times

February 2, 2010 -- A new study shows for the first time that a sex education class emphasizing abstinence only -- ignoring moral implications of sexual activity -- can reduce sexual activity by nearly a third in 12- and 13-year-olds compared with students who received no sex education.

Other forms of sex education also worked, however, reducing sexual activity by about 20% and reducing multiple sexual partners by about 40%, according to the study reported Monday in the Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine.

None of the classes appeared to influence the use of condoms or other birth control when the students did have sex. The children thus remained at risk of pregnancy and disease.  >>more>>

Archives of Pediatric Adolescent Medicine:  A Randomized Controlled Trial of a Theory-Based Abstinence-Only Intervention Over 24 Months

Despite the widespread implementation of abstinence interventions for prevention of sexual risk behaviors in adolescents and the controversy regarding their appropriateness, few randomized controlled trials have tested their efficacy. In this study, African American sixth- and seventh-grade students were randomly assigned to an 8-hour abstinence-only intervention, an 8-hour safer sex–only intervention, an 8- or 12-hour combined abstinence and safer-sex intervention, or an 8-hour health-promotion control group. The probability of ever having sexual intercourse by the 24-month follow-up was 33.5% in the abstinence-only intervention and 48.5% in the health-promotion control group; the safer-sex and comprehensive interventions did not differ from the control group in sexual initiation. None of the interventions had significant effects on consistent condom use or unprotected intercourse. Selective use of theory-based abstinence-only interventions might contribute to the overall goal of curbing the spread of sexually transmitted infections in both the United States and other countries.

 

EXTRACT:  Archives of Pediatric Adolescent Medicine 2010;164(2):152-159. Vol. 164 No. 2, February 2010

Efficacy of a Theory-Based Abstinence-Only Intervention Over 24 Months: A Randomized Controlled Trial With Young Adolescents 

John B. Jemmott III, PhD; Loretta S. Jemmott, PhD, RN; Geoffrey T. Fong, PhD

Objective To evaluate the efficacy of an abstinence-only intervention in preventing sexual involvement in young adolescents.

Design Randomized controlled trial.

Setting Urban public schools.

Participants A total of 662 African American students in grades 6 and 7.

Interventions An 8-hour abstinence-only intervention targeted reduced sexual intercourse; an 8-hour safer sex–only intervention targeted increased condom use; 8-hour and 12-hour comprehensive interventions targeted sexual intercourse and condom use; and an 8-hour health-promotion control intervention targeted health issues unrelated to sexual behavior. Participants also were randomized to receive or not receive an intervention maintenance program to extend intervention efficacy.

Outcome Measures The primary outcome was self-report of ever having sexual intercourse by the 24-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes were other sexual behaviors.

Results The participants' mean age was 12.2 years; 53.5% were girls; and 84.4% were still enrolled at 24 months. Abstinence-only intervention reduced sexual initiation (risk ratio [RR], 0.67; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.48-0.96). The model-estimated probability of ever having sexual intercourse by the 24-month follow-up was 33.5% in the abstinence-only intervention and 48.5% in the control group. Fewer abstinence-only intervention participants (20.6%) than control participants (29.0%) reported having coitus in the previous 3 months during the follow-up period (RR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.90-0.99). Abstinence-only intervention did not affect condom use. The 8-hour (RR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.92-1.00) and 12-hour comprehensive (RR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.91-0.99) interventions reduced reports of having multiple partners compared with the control group. No other differences between interventions and controls were significant.

Conclusion Theory-based abstinence-only interventions may have an important role in preventing adolescent sexual involvement.

Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00640653

Author Affiliations: School of Medicine and Annenberg School for Communication (Dr J. B. Jemmott), and School of Nursing Science (Dr L. S. Jemmott), University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia; and Department of Psychology, University of Waterloo, and Ontario Institute for Cancer Research, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada (Dr Fong).