1. METHODS This was an evidenced-based medicine literature review using Medline and included articles from 1998 to the present. Peer-reviewed articles were chosen based on the requirement that each article was to be retrospective, a randomized controlled trial, cohort,actual use study or a literature review. The following key terms were used: emergency contraception, EC, Plan B, levonorgestrel, advanced provision, OTC, over-the-counter, deregulation, regulation, prescription. Twenty-six articles met the criteria. This was an evidenced-based medicine literature review using Medline and included articles from 1998 to the present. Peer-reviewed articles were chosen based on the requirement that each article was to be retrospective, a randomized controlled trial, cohort, actual use study or a literature review. The following key terms were used: emergency contraception, EC, Plan B, levonorgestrel, advanced provision, OTC, over-the-counter, deregulation, regulation, prescription. Twenty-six articles met the criteria. CONCLUSIONS This review found no evidence to indicate that regulated access to EC is more advantageous than deregulated. Deregulation and increased accessibility to EC leads to increased usage, promotes timely access, does not compromise routine use of contraceptives and is safe enough to be dispensed OTC or in advanced provisions. Of all deregulated methods of EC, AEC proves to be the best route to EC access. Women need to be educated on reproduction and fertility risks so they understand the need and importance of EC availability and usage. A comparative analysis of regulated vs. deregulated emergency contraception Alicia Nguyen, PA-S and Patricia Bunton, MS, PA-C Department of Physician Assistant College of Health Professions, Wichita State University College of Health Professions, Wichita State University INTRODUCTION The United States holds the highest rate for unplanned teen pregnancies among all developed countries in the world. It is apparent that abstinence and the utilization of contraceptives are vital in the reduction of these numbers. Among all methods of contraception, accessibility to emergency contraception (EC) has been problematic, as has education regarding its proper utilization. Central arguments that have prevented deregulation of EC include concern that improved access would compromise routine contraceptive use and increase the incidence of risky behavior and/or sexually transmitted diseases. Methods that would constitute as deregulation or increased access of EC would include direct supply by pharmacies or emergency departments, advanced provision of emergency contraception (AEC) by health professionals and dispensing of EC over-the- counter (OTC). RESULTS Eight of 12 studies showed that most patients used EC correctly and had a good understanding of the mechanism of action, the therapeutic uses and/or its adverse effects. Four studies indicated pregnancy rates in treatment groups were higher than expected. Despite improved access and an increase in EC usage, EC is still underused. One study showed that increased access to EC negatively affected the use of routine contraception. Two studies showed that, although AEC led to a higher likelihood of timely use compared to obtaining EC through clinic access, those who received AEC had higher rates of unprotected sex. Other studies have indicated that risky behavior is not associated with increased EC availability. DISCUSSION This evidence-based review supports findings of other studies. It is interesting to note that although AEC allowed for earlier and more timely access to EC, those who had AEC were not using it when it was indicated because they did not believe they were at an increased risk of pregnancy. Future comparison studies of the risks and benefits of EC need to include OTC and pharmacy access, as well as AEC, to evaluate patient behavior when there are various deregulated routes of EC access.