Juan Eduardo Rios Rodriguez, Déborah Cristina Andrade Neves, Alexandre Kapteinat Lima, Felipe Nogueira Clementoni, Paula Heroso Moreira, Ana Laura Moura Baroncini, Natália Elena Trentiny Barbosa, Giovanna Victória Valentim Mantovani, Eduardo DE Falchi Mantovani, Douglas Jun Kamei
Patients undergoing vasectomy presented an epidemiological profile similar to that described in the international literature, with the decision predominantly based on completion of family planning. Despite the widespread availability of the procedure, male knowledge regarding other contraceptive methods remained limited, regardless of educational level, which underscores the importance of structured preoperative counseling and strategies aimed at male contraceptive education within SUS.
INTRODUCTION: Vasectomy is a definitive male contraceptive method recognized for its safety, effectiveness, and low cost. Nevertheless, male participation in contraception remains limited, particularly when compared with female contraceptive methods. In Brazil, data regarding the sociodemographic profile of men undergoing vasectomy and their knowledge of other contraceptive methods remain scarce, especially within the context of the Brazilian Unified Health System (SUS).
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the epidemiological profile of patients undergoing vasectomy at a university hospital, as well as their knowledge of other contraceptive methods and the reasons leading to the choice of the procedure.
METHODS: This was an observational, retrospective, cross-sectional study conducted through the review of medical records of patients who underwent vasectomy at a university hospital. Sociodemographic and clinical data, as well as information regarding knowledge of contraceptive methods and reasons for undergoing vasectomy, were collected from preoperative records.
RESULTS: A total of 181 patients were included, with a mean age of 39.4 ± 6.6 years. Most participants were married (72.4%) and had a mean of 2.1 children. The predominant educational level was high school education (55.2%). Most patients (86.2%) reported knowing at least one contraceptive method, with a mean of 2.8 ± 1.7 known methods. The main reason for undergoing vasectomy was completion of family planning (66.9%). No statistically significant association was observed between educational level and knowledge of contraceptive methods or the reason for vasectomy. Younger patients tended to report knowledge of a greater number of contraceptive methods, although this correlation was weak.
CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing vasectomy presented an epidemiological profile similar to that described in the international literature, with the decision predominantly based on completion of family planning. Despite the widespread availability of the procedure, male knowledge regarding other contraceptive methods remained limited, regardless of educational level, which underscores the importance of structured preoperative counseling and strategies aimed at male contraceptive education within SUS.