Daniel Grossman1, Kari White, Kristine Hopkins, Jon Amastae, Michele Shedlin, Joseph E Potter. 1. From Ibis Reproductive Health, Oakland, California; the Population Research Center, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas; the College of Health Sciences and Department of Languages and Linguistics, University of Texas at El Paso, El Paso, Texas; and the College of Nursing, New York University, New York, New York.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the estimated proportion of contraindications to combined oral contraceptives between women who obtained combined oral contraceptives in U.S. public clinics compared with women who obtained combined oral contraceptives over the counter (OTC) in Mexican pharmacies. METHODS: We recruited a cohort of 501 women who were residents of El Paso, Texas, who obtained OTC combined oral contraceptives in Mexico and 514 women who obtained combined oral contraceptives from family planning clinics in El Paso. Based on self-report of World Health Organization category 3 and 4 contraindications and interviewer-measured blood pressure, we estimated the proportion of contraindications and, using multivariable-adjusted logistic regression, identified possible predictors of contraindications. RESULTS: The estimated proportion of any category 3 or 4 contraindication was 18%. Relative contraindications (category 3) were more common among OTC users (13% compared with 9% among clinic users, P=.006). Absolute contraindications (category 4) were not different between the groups (5% for clinic users compared with 7% for OTC users, P=.162). Hypertension was the most prevalent contraindication (5.6% of clinic users and 9.8% of OTC users). After multivariable adjustment, OTC users had higher odds of having contraindications compared with clinic users (odds ratio [OR] 1.59, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.11-2.29). Women aged 35 years or older (OR 5.30, 95% CI 3.59-7.81) and those with body mass index 30.0 or more (OR 2.24, 95% CI 1.40-3.56) also had higher odds of having contraindications. CONCLUSION: Relative combined oral contraceptive contraindications are more common among OTC users in this setting. Progestin-only pills might be a better candidate for the first OTC product given their fewer contraindications.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the estimated proportion of contraindications to combined oral contraceptives between women who obtained combined oral contraceptives in U.S. public clinics compared with women who obtained combined oral contraceptives over the counter (OTC) in Mexican pharmacies. METHODS: We recruited a cohort of 501 women who were residents of El Paso, Texas, who obtained OTC combined oral contraceptives in Mexico and 514 women who obtained combined oral contraceptives from family planning clinics in El Paso. Based on self-report of World Health Organization category 3 and 4 contraindications and interviewer-measured blood pressure, we estimated the proportion of contraindications and, using multivariable-adjusted logistic regression, identified possible predictors of contraindications. RESULTS: The estimated proportion of any category 3 or 4 contraindication was 18%. Relative contraindications (category 3) were more common among OTC users (13% compared with 9% among clinic users, P=.006). Absolute contraindications (category 4) were not different between the groups (5% for clinic users compared with 7% for OTC users, P=.162). Hypertension was the most prevalent contraindication (5.6% of clinic users and 9.8% of OTC users). After multivariable adjustment, OTC users had higher odds of having contraindications compared with clinic users (odds ratio [OR] 1.59, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.11-2.29). Women aged 35 years or older (OR 5.30, 95% CI 3.59-7.81) and those with body mass index 30.0 or more (OR 2.24, 95% CI 1.40-3.56) also had higher odds of having contraindications. CONCLUSION: Relative combined oral contraceptive contraindications are more common among OTC users in this setting. Progestin-only pills might be a better candidate for the first OTC product given their fewer contraindications.
Authors: Daniel Grossman; Leticia Fernández; Kristine Hopkins; Jon Amastae; Joseph E Potter Journal: Contraception Date: 2009-10-29 Impact factor: 3.375
Authors: Daniel Grossman; Leticia Fernandez; Kristine Hopkins; Jon Amastae; Sandra G Garcia; Joseph E Potter Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2008-09 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: Julianne R Lauring; Erik B Lehman; Timothy A Deimling; Richard S Legro; Cynthia H Chuang Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2016-04-05 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Kari White; Joseph E Potter; Kristine Hopkins; Leticia Fernández; Jon Amastae; Daniel Grossman Journal: Contraception Date: 2012-02-24 Impact factor: 3.375
Authors: Arielle Mendel; Sasha Bernatsky; Christian A Pineau; Yvan St-Pierre; John G Hanly; Murray B Urowitz; Ann E Clarke; Juanita Romero-Diaz; Caroline Gordon; Sang-Cheol Bae; Daniel J Wallace; Joan T Merrill; Jill Buyon; David A Isenberg; Anisur Rahman; Ellen M Ginzler; Michelle Petri; Mary Anne Dooley; Paul Fortin; Dafna D Gladman; Kristján Steinsson; Rosalind Ramsey-Goldman; Munther A Khamashta; Cynthia Aranow; Meggan Mackay; Graciela Alarcón; Susan Manzi; Ola Nived; Andreas Jönsen; Asad A Zoma; Ronald F van Vollenhoven; Manuel Ramos-Casals; Giuillermo Ruiz-Irastorza; Sam Lim; Kenneth C Kalunian; Murat Inanc; Diane L Kamen; Christine A Peschken; Søren Jacobsen; Anca Askanase; Jorge Sanchez-Guerrero; Ian N Bruce; Nathalie Costedoat-Chalumeau; Evelyne Vinet Journal: Rheumatology (Oxford) Date: 2019-07-01 Impact factor: 7.580
Authors: Colleen P Judge; Xinhua Zhao; Florentina E Sileanu; Maria K Mor; Sonya Borrero Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2017-10-27 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Bhawana Shrestha; Alison Schaefer; Elizabeth C Chavez; Alexander J Kopp; Timothy M Jacobs; Thomas R Moench; Samuel K Lai Journal: Acta Biomater Date: 2020-09-13 Impact factor: 8.947
Authors: Bhawana Shrestha; Alison Schaefer; Yong Zhu; Jamal Saada; Timothy M Jacobs; Elizabeth C Chavez; Stuart S Olmsted; Carlos A Cruz-Teran; Gabriela Baldeon Vaca; Kathleen Vincent; Thomas R Moench; Samuel K Lai Journal: Sci Transl Med Date: 2021-08-11 Impact factor: 17.956