Literature DB >> 9708750

Randomised controlled trial of levonorgestrel versus the Yuzpe regimen of combined oral contraceptives for emergency contraception. Task Force on Postovulatory Methods of Fertility Regulation.

.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A previous randomised study suggested that the progestagen, levonorgestrel, given alone in two separate doses each of 0.75 mg caused nausea and vomiting in fewer women and might be more effective than the Yuzpe regimen of combined oral contraceptives for emergency contraception, although the difference was not significant. We compared these two regimens when started within 72 h of unprotected coitus.
METHODS: We enrolled in the double-blind, randomised trial 1998 women at 21 centres worldwide. Women with regular menses, not using hormonal contraception, and requesting emergency contraception after one unprotected coitus, received levonorgestrel (0.75 mg, repeated 12 h later) or the Yuzpe regimen (ethinyloestradiol 100 microg plus levonorgestrel 0.5 mg, repeated 12 h later).
FINDINGS: Outcome was unknown for 43 women (25 assigned levonorgestrel, 18 assigned Yuzpe regimen). Among the remaining 1955 women, the crude pregnancy rate was 1.1% (11/976) in the levonorgestrel group compared with 3.2% (31/979) in the Yuzpe regimen group. The crude relative risk of pregnancy for levonorgestrel compared with the Yuzpe regimen was 0.36 (95% CI 0.18-0.70). The proportion of pregnancies prevented (compared with the expected number without treatment) was 85% (74-93) with the levonorgestrel regimen and 57% (39-71) with the Yuzpe regimen. Nausea (23.1 vs 50.5%) and vomiting (5.6 vs 18.8%) were significantly less frequent with the levonorgestrel regimen than with the Yuzpe regimen (p<0.01). The efficacy of both treatments declined with increasing time since unprotected coitus (p=0.01).
INTERPRETATION: The levonorgestrel regimen was better tolerated and more effective than the current standard in hormonal emergency contraception. With either regimen, the earlier the treatment is given, the more effective it seems to be.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9708750

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lancet        ISSN: 0140-6736            Impact factor:   79.321


  84 in total

1.  Preventing teenage pregnancies, supporting teenage mothers.

Authors:  C Mawer
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1999-06-26

Review 2.  Emergency contraceptives over the counter. Allowing easy access is important.

Authors:  D A Grimes
Journal:  West J Med       Date:  2000-03

3.  Levonorgestrel versus the "Yuzpe" regimen. New choices in emergency contraception.

Authors:  S M Lee; S Dunn; M F Evans
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 3.275

4.  Drug Points: Apparent interaction between warfarin and levonorgestrel used for emergency contraception.

Authors:  J Ellison; A J Thomson; I A Greer; I D Walker
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2000-12-02

5.  Reducing unintended pregnancy by increasing access to emergency contraceptive pills.

Authors:  M Hayes; J Hutchings; P Hayes
Journal:  Matern Child Health J       Date:  2000-09

6.  Modeling the cost and outcomes of pharmacist-prescribed emergency contraception.

Authors:  K D Marciante; J S Gardner; D L Veenstra; S D Sullivan
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 9.308

Review 7.  [Emergency contraception].

Authors:  I Lete Lasa; M Arróniz; R Esquisábel
Journal:  Aten Primaria       Date:  2001-06-15       Impact factor: 1.137

8.  Emergency contraception: a matter of dedication and access.

Authors:  E Weir
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2001-10-16       Impact factor: 8.262

9.  Post-rape care in hospital emergency rooms.

Authors:  J M Goldenring; G Allred
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 9.308

Review 10.  Emergency contraception: a review of current oral options.

Authors:  Marisa N Mendez
Journal:  West J Med       Date:  2002-05
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.