Context. No more than one third of women in Russia use planned highly effective methods of contraception. Emergency contraception (EC) often plays a role of default method for the prevention of unwanted pregnancies. Objective. To determine the frequency of EC usage in women with higher medical education and without medical education (ME); to assess the level of EC awareness among women and men of the same categories. Methods. The method of anonymous questioning was used. The questionnaire included 36 items about the theoretical aspects of EC (n=12) (filled in by men and women), history and personal experience of EC application (n=24) (women only). Patient (s). 408 respondents participated in the investigation: 64.7% (n=264) – doctors of various specialties (I group), 35.3% (n=144) – people without ME (II group). Group I was divided into 2 subgroups: Ia – obstetrician-gynecologists (n=118), Ib – doctors of other specialties (n=146). 85% (n=347) women and 15% (n=61) men participated. The group was a simple random sample. Results. Every second women had at least one unplanned pregnancy (n=181). Half of them (n=101) were interrupted with artificial abortion (artificial abortions were 1.5 times more common among doctors). Half of the women has used EC, 2/3 of them – repeatedly. 50% of respondents knew about high efficiency of hormonal EC. 86% (n=227) doctors and 65% (n=94) of participants without ME considered the usage of EC acceptable. 48% of participants in Ib и II cohorts and only 60% of obstetrician-gynecologists were aware of correct regiments for the EC use. 40% of the respondents in Ib и II cohort and 25% of obstetrician-gynecologists wrongly suggested that repeated application of EC leads to infertility. 10% (n=44) of the participants in both groups considered that EC had serious side effects. 1,7% (!) of obstetrician-gynecologists and about 6,5% of others chose a condom as emergency contraceptive. Conclusions. Every second woman among all respondents had the EC experience. The awareness of obstetrician-gynecologists about EC was better than the participants without ME and doctors who were not obstetrician-gynecologists, but additional training is required.