Literature DB >> 23235628

Immediate start of hormonal contraceptives for contraception.

Laureen M Lopez1, Sara J Newmann, David A Grimes, Kavita Nanda, Kenneth F Schulz.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Health care providers often tell women to wait until the next menses to begin hormonal contraception. The intent is to avoid contraceptive use during an undetected pregnancy. An alternative is to start hormonal contraception immediately with back-up birth control for the first seven days. Immediate initiation was introduced with combined oral contraceptives (COCs), and has expanded to other hormonal contraceptives. At the time of the initial review, how immediate start compared to conventional menses-dependent start was unclear regarding effectiveness, continuation, and acceptability. The immediate-start approach may improve women's access to, and continuation of, hormonal contraception.
OBJECTIVES: This review examined randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of immediate-start hormonal contraception for differences in effectiveness, continuation, and acceptability. SEARCH
METHODS: In August 2012, we searched MEDLINE, CENTRAL, POPLINE, LILACS, ClinicalTrials.gov, and ICTRP for trials of immediate-start hormonal contraceptives. We contacted researchers to find other studies. Earlier searches also included EMBASE. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included RCTs that compared immediate start to conventional start of hormonal contraception. Also included were trials that compared immediate start of different hormonal contraceptive methods with each other. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data were abstracted by two authors and entered into RevMan. The Peto odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated. MAIN
RESULTS: Five studies were included. No new eligible studies have been found since the review was initially conducted. Method discontinuation was similar between groups in all trials. Bleeding patterns and side effects were similar in trials that compared immediate with conventional start. In a study of depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA), immediate start of DMPA showed fewer pregnancies than a 'bridge' method before DMPA (OR 0.36; 95% CI 0.16 to 0.84). Further, more women in the immediate-DMPA group were very satisfied versus those with a 'bridge' method (OR 1.99; 95% CI 1.05 to 3.77). A trial of two immediate-start methods showed the vaginal ring group had less prolonged bleeding (OR 0.42; 95% CI 0.20 to 0.89) and less frequent bleeding (OR 0.23; 95% CI 0.05 to 1.03) than COC users. The ring group also reported fewer side effects. Also, more immediate ring users were very satisfied than immediate COC users (OR 2.88; 95% CI 1.59 to 5.22). AUTHORS'
CONCLUSIONS: We found limited evidence that immediate start of hormonal contraception reduces unintended pregnancies or increases method continuation. However, the pregnancy rate was lower with immediate start of DMPA versus another method. Some differences were associated with contraceptive type rather than initiation method, i.e., immediate ring versus immediate COC. More studies are needed of immediate versus conventional start of the same hormonal contraceptive.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23235628      PMCID: PMC6956679          DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006260.pub3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev        ISSN: 1361-6137


  29 in total

1.  Comparison of contraceptive method chosen by women with and without a recent history of induced abortion.

Authors:  Tessa Madden; Gina M Secura; Jenifer E Allsworth; Jeffrey F Peipert
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2011-05-04       Impact factor: 3.375

2.  Adolescent compliance and side effects with Quick Start initiation of oral contraceptive pills.

Authors:  Eduardo Lara-Torre; Betsy Schroeder
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 3.375

3.  Ruling out pregnancy among family planning clients: the impact of a checklist in three countries.

Authors:  John Stanback; Fatimata Diabate; Thierno Dieng; Telma Duarte de Morales; Stirling Cummings; Mahamodou Traoré
Journal:  Stud Fam Plann       Date:  2005-12

4.  Sample size calculations in randomised trials: mandatory and mystical.

Authors:  Kenneth F Schulz; David A Grimes
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2005 Apr 9-15       Impact factor: 79.321

5.  Depo Now: preventing unintended pregnancies among adolescents and young adults.

Authors:  Vaughn I Rickert; Lorraine Tiezzi; Judy Lipshutz; Jacquelyn León; Roger D Vaughan; Carolyn Westhoff
Journal:  J Adolesc Health       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 5.012

6.  Bleeding patterns after immediate initiation of an oral compared with a vaginal hormonal contraceptive.

Authors:  Carolyn Westhoff; Lauren M Osborne; Julie E Schafer; Chelsea Morroni
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 7.661

7.  Randomised clinical trial to determine optimum initiation time of norgestrel-progestin only contraception in Eldoret Teaching Hospital, Kenya.

Authors:  E O Were; J Z Kendall; P Nyongesa
Journal:  East Afr Med J       Date:  1997-02

Review 8.  Combined oral contraceptives: acceptability and effective use.

Authors:  A Kubba; J Guillebaud
Journal:  Br Med Bull       Date:  1993-01       Impact factor: 4.291

9.  Initiation of oral contraceptives--start now!

Authors:  Sharon M Edwards; Mimi Zieman; Kandice Jones; Angela Diaz; Christina Robilotto; Carolyn Westhoff
Journal:  J Adolesc Health       Date:  2008-11       Impact factor: 5.012

10.  Initiation of oral contraceptives using a quick start compared with a conventional start: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Carolyn Westhoff; Stephen Heartwell; Sharon Edwards; Mimi Zieman; Linda Cushman; Christina Robilotto; Gretchen Stuart; Chelsea Morroni; Debra Kalmuss
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 7.661

View more
  3 in total

1.  Challenges in Translating PrEP Interest Into Uptake in an Observational Study of Young Black MSM.

Authors:  Charlotte-Paige Rolle; Eli S Rosenberg; Aaron J Siegler; Travis H Sanchez; Nicole Luisi; Kevin Weiss; Scott Cutro; Carlos Del Rio; Patrick S Sullivan; Colleen F Kelley
Journal:  J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr       Date:  2017-11-01       Impact factor: 3.731

Review 2.  Immediate versus delayed postabortal insertion of contraceptive implant.

Authors:  Jen Sothornwit; Nuntasiri Eamudomkarn; Pisake Lumbiganon; Nampet Jampathong; Mario R Festin; Lingling Salang
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2022-05-18

3.  Rates of pregnancy among levonorgestrel and copper intrauterine emergency contraception initiators: Implications for backup contraception recommendations.

Authors:  Kathryn E Fay; Amelia C Clement; Alexandra Gero; Jennifer E Kaiser; Jessica N Sanders; Abena A BakenRa; David K Turok
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2021-06-21       Impact factor: 3.051

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.