Literature DB >> 26259905

Three-year continuation of reversible contraception.

Justin T Diedrich1, Qiuhong Zhao1, Tessa Madden1, Gina M Secura1, Jeffrey F Peipert2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this analysis was to estimate the 3-year continuation rates of long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARC) methods and to compare these rates to non-LARC methods. STUDY
DESIGN: The Contraceptive CHOICE Project (CHOICE) was a prospective cohort study that followed 9256 participants with telephone surveys at 3 and 6 months, then every 6 months for 2-3 years. We estimated 3-year continuation rates of baseline methods that were chosen at enrollment. The LARC methods include the 52-mg levonorgestrel intrauterine device; the copper intrauterine device, and the subdermal implant). These were then compared to rates to non-LARC hormonal methods (depot medroxyprogesterone acetate, oral contraceptive pills, contraceptive patch, and vaginal ring). Eligibility criteria for this analysis included participants who started their baseline chosen method by the 3-month survey. Participants who discontinued their method to attempt conception were censored. We used a Cox proportional hazard model to adjust for confounding and to estimate the hazard ratio for risk of discontinuation.
RESULTS: Our analytic sample consisted of 4708 CHOICE participants who met inclusion criteria. Three-year continuation rates were 69.8% for users of the levonorgestrel intrauterine device, 69.7% for copper intrauterine device users, and 56.2% for implant users. At 3 years, continuation was 67.2% among LARC users and 31.0% among non-LARC users (P < .001). After adjustment for age, race, education, socioeconomic status, parity, and history of sexually transmitted infection, the hazard ratio for risk of discontinuation was 3-fold higher among non-LARC method users than LARC users (adjusted hazard ratio, 3.08; 95% confidence interval, 2.80-3.39).
CONCLUSION: Three-year continuation of the 2 intrauterine devices approached 70%. Continuation of LARC methods was significantly higher than non-LARC methods.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  continuation; contraception; intrauterine device; long-acting reversible contraception; subdermal implant

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26259905      PMCID: PMC5292132          DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2015.08.001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0002-9378            Impact factor:   8.661


  19 in total

1.  Acceptability of the long-term contraceptive levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (Mirena): a 3-year follow-up study.

Authors:  Erika Baldaszti; Beate Wimmer-Puchinger; Kathleen Löschke
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 3.375

2.  An assessment of the first 3 years' use of Implanon in Luton.

Authors:  Anjali Agrawal; Christine Robinson
Journal:  J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care       Date:  2005-10

3.  Continuation of reversible contraception in teenagers and young women.

Authors:  Jessica R Rosenstock; Jeffrey F Peipert; Tessa Madden; Qiuhong Zhao; Gina M Secura
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 7.661

4.  Provision of no-cost, long-acting contraception and teenage pregnancy.

Authors:  Gina M Secura; Tessa Madden; Colleen McNicholas; Jennifer Mullersman; Christina M Buckel; Qiuhong Zhao; Jeffrey F Peipert
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2014-10-02       Impact factor: 91.245

5.  Use of the etonogestrel implant and levonorgestrel intrauterine device beyond the U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved duration.

Authors:  Colleen McNicholas; Ragini Maddipati; Qiuhong Zhao; Erin Swor; Jeffrey F Peipert
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 7.661

6.  Intrauterine contraception with copper and with levonorgestrel: a randomized study of the TCu 380Ag and levonorgestrel 20 mcg/day devices.

Authors:  I Sivin; F Alvarez; J Diaz; S Diaz; S el Mahgoub; E Coutinho; V Brache; M M Diaz; A Faundes; M Pavez
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  1984-11       Impact factor: 3.375

7.  Twenty-four-month continuation of reversible contraception.

Authors:  Micaela O'Neil-Callahan; Jeffrey F Peipert; Qiuhong Zhao; Tessa Madden; Gina Secura
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2013-11       Impact factor: 7.661

8.  A randomized multicentre trial of the Multiload 375 and TCu380A IUDs in parous women: three-year results. UNDP/UNFPA/WHO/World Bank, Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction: IUD Research Group.

Authors: 
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  1994-06       Impact factor: 3.375

9.  A three-year comparative study of continuation rates, bleeding patterns and satisfaction in Australian women using a subdermal contraceptive implant or progestogen releasing-intrauterine system.

Authors:  Edith Weisberg; Deborah Bateson; Kevin McGeechan; Lita Mohapatra
Journal:  Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care       Date:  2013-11-14       Impact factor: 1.848

10.  Structured contraceptive counseling provided by the Contraceptive CHOICE Project.

Authors:  Tessa Madden; Jennifer L Mullersman; Karen J Omvig; Gina M Secura; Jeffrey F Peipert
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2012-09-05       Impact factor: 3.375

View more
  25 in total

1.  Knowledge of and concerns about long-acting reversible contraception among women in medication-assisted treatment for opioid use disorder.

Authors:  Alexis K Matusiewicz; Heidi S Melbostad; Sarah H Heil
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2017-08-02       Impact factor: 3.375

2.  Tamoxifen for the prevention of unscheduled bleeding in new users of the levonorgestrel 52-mg intrauterine system: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Megan A Cohen; Katharine B Simmons; Alison B Edelman; Jeffrey T Jensen
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2019-06-18       Impact factor: 3.375

3.  Improving information on intrauterine contraception: providing advice in primary care.

Authors:  Hannat Akintomide
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2019-02       Impact factor: 5.386

Review 4.  Contraceptive Considerations for Women with Gastrointestinal Disorders.

Authors:  Aparna Sridhar; Carrie A Cwiak; Andrew M Kaunitz; Rebecca H Allen
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2016-11-24       Impact factor: 3.199

5.  Is Reclassification of the Oral Contraceptive Pill from Prescription to Pharmacist-Only Cost Effective? Application of an Economic Evaluation Approach to Regulatory Decisions.

Authors:  Mutsa Gumbie; Bonny Parkinson; Henry Cutler; Natalie Gauld; Virginia Mumford
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2019-08       Impact factor: 4.981

6.  Contraception values and preferences of people living with HIV: A systematic review.

Authors:  Haneefa T Saleem; Joseph G Rosen; Caitlin Quinn; Avani Duggaraju; Caitlin E Kennedy
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2021-11-05       Impact factor: 3.051

7.  Vaginal ring acceptability: A systematic review and meta-analysis of vaginal ring experiences from around the world.

Authors:  Kathleen Ridgeway; Elizabeth T Montgomery; Kevin Smith; Kristine Torjesen; Ariane van der Straten; Sharon L Achilles; Jennifer B Griffin
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2021-10-10       Impact factor: 3.051

8.  Ensuring our research reflects our values: The role of family planning research in advancing reproductive autonomy.

Authors:  Christine Dehlendorf; Reiley Reed; Edith Fox; Dominika Seidman; Cara Hall; Jody Steinauer
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2018-03-12       Impact factor: 3.375

9.  Discontinuation rates of different contraceptive methods in Thai women up to 1-year after method initiation.

Authors:  Unnop Jaisamrarn; Monchai Santipap; Somsook Santibenchakul
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-05-24       Impact factor: 4.379

10.  Final Program Data and Factors Associated With Long-Acting Reversible Contraception Removal: The Zika Contraception Access Network.

Authors:  Eva Lathrop; Stacey Hurst; Zipatly Mendoza; Lauren B Zapata; Pierina Cordero; Rachel Powell; Caitlin Green; Nilda Moreno; Denise J Jamieson; Lisa Romero
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2020-05       Impact factor: 7.623

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.