Literature DB >> 18238962

Multicenter comparison of the contraceptive ring and patch: a randomized controlled trial.

Mitchell D Creinin1, Leslie A Meyn, Lynn Borgatta, Kurt Barnhart, Jeff Jensen, Anne E Burke, Carolyn Westhoff, Melissa Gilliam, Caryn Dutton, Susan A Ballagh.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To understand if the contraceptive ring or patch was more acceptable, as measured primarily by continuation, to women using an oral contraceptive and interested in a nondaily, combined hormonal contraceptive.
METHODS: Five hundred women were randomly assigned to use the contraceptive ring (n=249) or contraceptive patch (n=251) for four consecutive menstrual cycles, starting with their next menses. Participants returned for a single follow-up visit during the fourth cycle for an evaluation, which included a questionnaire to assess acceptability and adverse effects.
RESULTS: Rates of completion of three cycles were 94.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 91.0-97.1%) and 88.2% (95% CI 83.4-92.0%) for ring and patch users, respectively (P=.03). Of these women, 71.0% (95% CI 64.8-76.6%) and 26.5% (95% CI 21.0-32.6%), respectively, planned to continue their method after the study (P<.001). Women switching to the patch were significantly more likely than women switching to the ring to experience longer periods (38% compared with 9%), increased dysmenorrhea (29% compared with 16%), frequent nausea (8% compared with 1%), frequent mood swings (14% compared with 8%), and frequent skin rash (12% compared with 2%) and were less likely to experience frequent vaginal discharge (8% compared with 17%). Ring users preferred the ring to the oral contraceptive (P<.001), and patch users preferred the oral contraceptive to the patch (P<.001). Nugent scores increased only in patch users (P=.01), although most of these women were asymptomatic.
CONCLUSION: Women satisfied with combined oral contraceptives and interested in a nondaily method are more likely to continue using the contraceptive ring than the contraceptive patch. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT00269620. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18238962     DOI: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000298338.58511.d1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0029-7844            Impact factor:   7.661


  26 in total

1.  CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials.

Authors:  David Moher; Sally Hopewell; Kenneth F Schulz; Victor Montori; Peter C Gøtzsche; P J Devereaux; Diana Elbourne; Matthias Egger; Douglas G Altman
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2010-03-23

Review 2.  Update on microbicide research and development - seeking new HIV prevention tools for women.

Authors:  T Mertenskoetter; Paulina E Kaptur
Journal:  Eur J Med Res       Date:  2011-01-27       Impact factor: 2.175

Review 3.  Drug delivery for the treatment of endometriosis and uterine fibroids.

Authors:  David R Friend
Journal:  Drug Deliv Transl Res       Date:  2017-12       Impact factor: 4.617

4.  Phase 1 Safety and Pharmacokinetics Study of MK-2048/Vicriviroc (MK-4176)/MK-2048A Intravaginal Rings.

Authors:  Craig J Hoesley; Beatrice A Chen; Peter L Anderson; Charlene S Dezzutti; Julie Strizki; Carol Sprinkle; Faye Heard; Jose Bauermeister; Wayne Hall; Cindy Jacobson; Jennifer Berthiaume; Ashley Mayo; Holly Gundacker; Nicola Richardson-Harman; Jeanna Piper
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2019-03-19       Impact factor: 9.079

5.  Phase 1 Pharmacokinetic Trial of 2 Intravaginal Rings Containing Different Dose Strengths of Vicriviroc (MK-4176) and MK-2048.

Authors:  Albert Y Liu; Jingyang Zhang; Peter L Anderson; Theresa Wagner; Zhenyu Pan; Melissa Peda; Kailazarid Gomez; May Beamer; Cindy Jacobson; Julie Strizki; Charlene S Dezzutti; Jeanna M Piper
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2019-03-19       Impact factor: 9.079

6.  Examining the efficacy, safety, and patient acceptability of the combined contraceptive vaginal ring (NuvaRing).

Authors:  Devorah R Wieder; Lynn Pattimakiel
Journal:  Int J Womens Health       Date:  2010-11-12

7.  Effects of oral, vaginal, and transdermal hormonal contraception on serum levels of coenzyme q(10), vitamin e, and total antioxidant activity.

Authors:  Prabhudas R Palan; Felix Strube; Juraj Letko; Azra Sadikovic; Magdy S Mikhail
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol Int       Date:  2010-08-09

8.  What's good and bad about contraceptive products?: a best-worst attribute experiment comparing the values of women consumers and GPs.

Authors:  Stephanie A Knox; Rosalie C Viney; Deborah J Street; Marion R Haas; Denzil G Fiebig; Edith Weisberg; Deborah Bateson
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2012-12-01       Impact factor: 4.981

9.  Acceptability of the Nestorone®/ethinyl estradiol contraceptive vaginal ring: development of a model; implications for introduction.

Authors:  Ruth B Merkatz; Marlena Plagianos; Elena Hoskin; Michael Cooney; Paul C Hewett; Barbara S Mensch
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2014-06-02       Impact factor: 3.375

10.  Safety and Pharmacokinetics of Quick-Dissolving Polymeric Vaginal Films Delivering the Antiretroviral IQP-0528 for Preexposure Prophylaxis.

Authors:  Priya Srinivasan; Jining Zhang; Amy Martin; Kristin Kelley; Janet M McNicholl; Robert W Buckheit; James M Smith; Anthony S Ham
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2016-06-20       Impact factor: 5.191

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.