Hanna Xu1, David L Eisenberg1, Tessa Madden1, Gina M Secura1, Jeffrey F Peipert2. 1. Division of Clinical Research, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO. 2. Division of Clinical Research, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO. Electronic address: peipertj@wustl.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to evaluate the prevalence of medical contraindications in a large group of women seeking combined hormonal contraception (CHC). STUDY DESIGN: The Contraceptive CHOICE Project is a prospective cohort study designed to promote the use of long-acting reversible contraceptive methods to reduce unintended pregnancies in the St Louis region. During baseline enrollment, participants were asked about their desired methods of contraception and medical history. Potential medical contraindications were defined as self-reported history of hypertension, myocardial infarction, cerebral vascular accidents, migraines with aura, any migraine and age 35 years or older, smoking in women older than 35 years, venous thromboembolism, or liver disease. We reviewed all research charts of women with self-reported medical contraindications to verify all conditions. Binomial 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated around percentages. RESULTS: Between August 2007 and December 2009, 5087 women who enrolled in the CHOICE Project provided information about their medical history and 1010 women (19.9%) desired CHC at baseline. Seventy women (6.93%; 95% CI, 5.44-8.68%) were defined as having a potential medical contraindication to CHC at baseline. After chart review, only 24 of 1010 participants desiring CHC (2.38%; 95% CI, 1.53-3.52%) were found to have true medical contraindications to CHC including 17 with hypertension, 2 with migraines with aura, 2 with a history of venous thromboembolism, and 3 smokers aged 35 years or older. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of medical contraindications to CHC was very low in this large sample of reproductive-aged women. This low prevalence supports provision of CHC without a prescription.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to evaluate the prevalence of medical contraindications in a large group of women seeking combined hormonal contraception (CHC). STUDY DESIGN: The Contraceptive CHOICE Project is a prospective cohort study designed to promote the use of long-acting reversible contraceptive methods to reduce unintended pregnancies in the St Louis region. During baseline enrollment, participants were asked about their desired methods of contraception and medical history. Potential medical contraindications were defined as self-reported history of hypertension, myocardial infarction, cerebral vascular accidents, migraines with aura, any migraine and age 35 years or older, smoking in women older than 35 years, venous thromboembolism, or liver disease. We reviewed all research charts of women with self-reported medical contraindications to verify all conditions. Binomial 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated around percentages. RESULTS: Between August 2007 and December 2009, 5087 women who enrolled in the CHOICE Project provided information about their medical history and 1010 women (19.9%) desired CHC at baseline. Seventy women (6.93%; 95% CI, 5.44-8.68%) were defined as having a potential medical contraindication to CHC at baseline. After chart review, only 24 of 1010 participants desiring CHC (2.38%; 95% CI, 1.53-3.52%) were found to have true medical contraindications to CHC including 17 with hypertension, 2 with migraines with aura, 2 with a history of venous thromboembolism, and 3 smokers aged 35 years or older. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of medical contraindications to CHC was very low in this large sample of reproductive-aged women. This low prevalence supports provision of CHC without a prescription.
Authors: Tina R Raine; Cynthia C Harper; Corinne H Rocca; Richard Fischer; Nancy Padian; Jeffrey D Klausner; Philip D Darney Journal: JAMA Date: 2005-01-05 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Anne M Larson; Julie Polson; Robert J Fontana; Timothy J Davern; Ezmina Lalani; Linda S Hynan; Joan S Reisch; Frank V Schiødt; George Ostapowicz; A Obaid Shakil; William M Lee Journal: Hepatology Date: 2005-12 Impact factor: 17.425
Authors: Aram V Chobanian; George L Bakris; Henry R Black; William C Cushman; Lee A Green; Joseph L Izzo; Daniel W Jones; Barry J Materson; Suzanne Oparil; Jackson T Wright; Edward J Roccella Journal: JAMA Date: 2003-05-14 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Daniel Grossman; Kate Grindlay; Rick Li; Joseph E Potter; James Trussell; Kelly Blanchard Journal: Contraception Date: 2013-04-23 Impact factor: 3.375
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: 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: Ghadah A Assiri; Douha F Bannan; Ghadah H Alshehri; Manal Alshyhani; Walaa Almatri; Mansour A Mahmoud Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-01-29 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Tracey A Wilkinson; Ashley H Meredith; Sally Rafie; Amy J Katz; Thomas L Vielott; Carolyn G Meagher; Mary A Ott Journal: J Adolesc Health Date: 2021-06-04 Impact factor: 7.830