Literature DB >> 33407632

A systematic review on clinical effectiveness, side-effect profile and meta-analysis on continuation rate of etonogestrel contraceptive implant.

Kusum V Moray1, Himanshu Chaurasia1, Oshima Sachin2, Beena Joshi3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Unintended pregnancies (UIP) have a significant impact on health of women and the health budget of countries. Contraception is an effective way to prevent UIPs. The study objective was to collate evidence on clinical effectiveness of etonogestrel subdermal implant (ESI), continuation rate and side effect profile among eligible women of reproductive age group, as compared to levonorgestrel intrauterine system (LNG-IUS), copper intrauterine device (Cu-IUD) and depot medroxy progesterone acetate injections; other types of contraceptive implants were excluded as comparators.
METHODS: The protocol of the systematic review was registered in Prospero (registration number: CRD42018116580). MEDLINE via PubMed, Cochrane library and web of science were the electronic databases searched. A search strategy was formulated and studies from 1998 to 2019 were included. Clinical trial registries and grey literature search was done. Critical assessment of included studies was done using appropriate tools. A qualitative synthesis of included studies was done and a meta-analysis was conducted in RevMan software for continuation rates of ESI as compared to other long acting reversible contraceptives (LARC) e.g. LNG IUS and Cu-IUD.
RESULTS: The search yielded 23,545 studies. After excluding 467 duplicates, 23,078 titles were screened and 51 studies were included for the review. Eight of the 15 studies reporting clinical effectiveness reported 100% effectiveness and overall pearl index ranged from 0 to 1.4. One-year continuation rates ranged from 57-97%; 44-95% at the end of second year and 25-78% by 3 years of use. Abnormal menstruation was the most commonly reported side effect. There was no significant difference in bone mineral density at 1 year follow-up. The meta-analyses showed that odds ratio (OR) of 1-year continuation rate was 1.55 (1.36, 1.76) for LNG-IUS vs. ESI and 1.34 (1.13, 1.58) for copper-IUD vs. ESI; showing that continuation rates at the end of one-year were higher in LNG-IUS and copper-IUD as compared to ESI.
CONCLUSION: ESI is clinically effective and safe contraceptive method to use, yet 1-year continuation rates are lower as compared to LNG-IUS and copper-IUD, mostly attributed to the disturbances in the menstruation.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Clinical effectiveness; Continuation rate; Etonogestrel subdermal contraceptive implant; Systematic review

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33407632      PMCID: PMC7788930          DOI: 10.1186/s12978-020-01054-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Reprod Health        ISSN: 1742-4755            Impact factor:   3.223


  62 in total

1.  Impact of etonogestrel-releasing implant and copper intrauterine device on carbohydrate metabolism: a comparative study.

Authors:  Carolina L Oderich; Maria Celeste O Wender; Jaqueline N Lubianca; Letícia M Santos; Grasiele C de Mello
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2011-09-17       Impact factor: 3.375

2.  Twelve month follow-up of a contraceptive implant outreach service in rural Papua New Guinea.

Authors:  Sarika Gupta; Glen Mola; Philippa Ramsay; Greg Jenkins; Wendy Stein; John Bolnga; Kirsten Black
Journal:  Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 2.100

3.  The continuation rates of long-acting reversible contraceptives in UK general practice using data from The Health Improvement Network.

Authors:  Lucía Cea Soriano; Mari-Ann Wallander; Susan Andersson; Anna Filonenko; Luis Alberto García Rodríguez
Journal:  Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf       Date:  2014-09-24       Impact factor: 2.890

4.  Preventing Unintended Pregnancy: The Contraceptive CHOICE Project in Review.

Authors:  Natalia E Birgisson; Qiuhong Zhao; Gina M Secura; Tessa Madden; Jeffrey F Peipert
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2015-03-31       Impact factor: 2.681

5.  Global, regional, and subregional trends in unintended pregnancy and its outcomes from 1990 to 2014: estimates from a Bayesian hierarchical model.

Authors:  Jonathan Bearak; Anna Popinchalk; Leontine Alkema; Gilda Sedgh
Journal:  Lancet Glob Health       Date:  2018-03-05       Impact factor: 26.763

6.  A 12-month multicenter, randomized study comparing the levonorgestrel intrauterine system with the etonogestrel subdermal implant.

Authors:  Dan Apter; Paula Briggs; Marjo Tuppurainen; Julia Grunert; Eeva Lukkari-Lax; Sarah Rybowski; Kristina Gemzell-Danielsson
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2016-03-24       Impact factor: 7.329

7.  Safety, efficacy and acceptability of implanon a single rod implantable contraceptive (etonogestrel) in University of Benin Teaching Hospital.

Authors:  A O Aisien; M E Enosolease
Journal:  Niger J Clin Pract       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 0.968

8.  Weight change at 12 months in users of three progestin-only contraceptive methods.

Authors:  Zevidah Vickery; Tessa Madden; Qiuhong Zhao; Gina M Secura; Jenifer E Allsworth; Jeffrey F Peipert
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2013-03-18       Impact factor: 3.375

9.  Prevalence of early discontinuation and associated factors among a retrospective cohort of etonogestrel contraceptive implant users.

Authors:  Andrea M Peterson; Amy Brown; Ashlyn Savage; Angela Dempsey
Journal:  Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care       Date:  2019-09-23       Impact factor: 1.848

10.  Twelve-month discontinuation of etonogestrel implant in an outpatient pediatric setting.

Authors:  Elise Berlan; Kelly Mizraji; Andrea E Bonny
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2016-03-03       Impact factor: 3.375

View more
  3 in total

1.  Etonogestrel implant effectiveness.

Authors:  Nicolas Dugré; Nidhi Choksi; Jessica Kirkwood
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2022-08       Impact factor: 3.025

2.  Prevalence of episiotomy practice and factors associated with it in Ethiopia, systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Zerihun Figa Deyaso; Tesfaye Temesgen Chekole; Rediet Gido Bedada; Wondwosen Molla; Etaferahu Bekele Uddo; Tizalegn Tesfaye Mamo
Journal:  Womens Health (Lond)       Date:  2022 Jan-Dec

Review 3.  Safety and Benefits of Contraceptives Implants: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Morena Luigia Rocca; Anna Rita Palumbo; Federica Visconti; Costantino Di Carlo
Journal:  Pharmaceuticals (Basel)       Date:  2021-06-08
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.