Experience in the use of low-dosed levonorgestrel-containing intrauterine system LCS16 and combined oral contraceptive containing 30 mcg ethinyl estradiol and 3 mg drospirenone in young women


Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription or Fee Access

Abstract

Objective: To assess the satisfaction of young nulliparous and parous women using low-dosed levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) or taking a combined oral contraceptive (COC) containing 30 mcg ethinyl estradiol and 3 mg drospirenone for 12 months. Materials and methods: The study included women aged 18-29 years (n=147) who used LNG-LUS LCS16 (n=74) or took COC (30 mcg ethinyl estradiol and 3 mg drospirenone) (n=73). We studied general satisfaction of the patients using the contraceptive method and the Likert scale 6 and 12 months after applying one of the contraception methods. We assessed the satisfaction using the bleeding and pain profile, treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE), preferences in contraception method and attrition rate. Results: The percentage of patients who considered themselves to be ‘very satisfied’ and ‘satisfied’ with the contraception method was 90.3% (65/72) in the group using the LUD, and 97.3% (71/73) in the group taking the COC for 12 months. There was a decrease in bleeding and pain when patients used both methods and a decrease in the number of days of blood loss in the LUD group after 12 months. Amenorrhea was observed in 7.7% (5/72) of the participants of the LUD group and in no cases in the COC group. The patients’ responses about the bleeding profile were ‘very satisfied’ or ‘rather satisfied’ in 94.3% (66/72) and 95.8% (69/73) of the cases, respectively. TEAE were revealed in 50% (36/72) of women in the LNG-LUS group and in 38.4% (28/73) of women in the COC group. After 12 months, 81.4% and 79.2% (57/73) women respectively wanted to continue using their method of contraception. Conclusion: Both contraception methods, LNG-LUS and COC, are characterized by high satisfaction rates.

Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

Larisa V. Suturina

Scientific Center for Family Health and Human Reproduction Problems

Email: lsuturina@mail.ru
Dr. Med. Sci., Professor, Chief Researcher, Head of the Department of Reproductive Health Protection

Galina B. Dikke

F.I. Inozemtsev Academy of Medical Education

Email: galadikke@yandex.ru
Dr Med. Sci., Associate Professor, Professor of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology with a course of reproductive medicine

References

  1. Sedgh G., Singh S., Hussain R. Intended and unintended pregnancies worldwide in 2012 and recent trends. Stud. Fam. Plann. 2014; 45(3): 301-14. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1728-4465.2014.00393.x.
  2. Federal State Statistics Service (ROSSTAT). Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation. Information and Publishing Center “Statistics of Russia”. Russia Reproductive Health Survey 2011. Executive summary. 2012.
  3. Федеральная служба государственной статистики. Здравоохранение в России. Статистический сборник. Росстат. М.; 2017. 170с. Доступно по: http://www.gks.ru/free_doc/doc_2017/zdrav17.pdf
  4. Montouchet C., Trussell J. Unintended pregnancies in England in 2010: costs to the National Health Service (NHS). Contraception. 2013; 87(2): 149-53. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2012.06.008.
  5. Finer L.B., Zolna M.R. Shifts in intended and unintended pregnancies in the United States, 2001-2008. Am. J. Public Health. 2014; 104(Suppl. 1): S43-8. https://dx.doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2013.301416.
  6. Mosher W.D., Jones J. Use of contraception in the United States: 1982-2008. Vital Health Stat. 23. 2010; (29): 1-44.
  7. Trussell J. Contraceptive failure in the United States. Contraception. 2011; 83(5): 397-404. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2011.01.021.
  8. NICE. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Long-acting reversible contraception (LARC). Clinical guideline. 2005. Available at: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg30
  9. ACOG Committee Opinion No. 735: adolescents and long-acting reversible contraception: implants and intrauterine devices. Obstet. Gynecol. 2018; 131(5): e130-e139. https://dx.doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000002632.
  10. Committee Opinion No. 642: increasing access to contraceptive implants and intrauterine devices to reduce unintended pregnancy. Obstet. Gynecol. 2015; 126(4): e44-e48. https://dx.doi.org/10.1097/A0G.0000000000001106.
  11. Committee on Practice Bulletins-Gynecology, Long-Acting Reversible Contraception Work Group. Practice Bulletin No. 186: long-acting reversible contraception: implants and intrauterine devices. Obstet. Gynecol. 2017; 130(5): e251-e269. https://dx.doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000002400.
  12. Lohr P.A., Lyus R., Prager S. Use of intrauterine devices in nulliparous women. Contraception. 2017; 95(6): 529-37. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2016.08.011.
  13. WНО Guidelines Approved by the Guidelines Review Committee. Medical eligibility criteria for contraceptive use. 5th ed. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2015.
  14. Heinemann K., Reed S., Moehner S., Minh T.D. Comparative contraceptive effectiveness of levonorgestrel-releasing and copper intrauterine devices: The European Active Surveillance Study for Intrauterine Devices. Contraception. 2015; 91(4): 280-3. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2015.01.011.
  15. Кузнецова И.В. Выбор комбинированной оральной контрацепции для подростков и молодых женщин. Акушерство и гинекология. 2018; 1: 35-40. [Kuznetsova I.V. Choice of combined oral contraception for adolescent girls and young women. Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2018; 1: 35-40. (in Russian)]. https://dx.doi.org/10.18565/aig.2018.1.35-40.
  16. Довлетханова Э.Р., Мгерян А.Н., Абакарова П.Р. Вопросы приемлемости и безопасности при выборе комбинированных оральных контрацептивов. Акушерство и гинекология. 2019; 4: 79-86. [Dovletkhanova E.R., Mgeryan A.N., Abakarova P.R. Issues of acceptability and safety when choosing combined oral contraceptives. Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2019; 4: 79-86. (in Russian)]. https://dx.doi.org/10.18565/aig.2019.4.79-86.
  17. Gemzell-Danielsson K., Apter D., Dermout S., Faustmann T., Rosen K., Schmelter T. et al. Evaluation of a new, low-dose levonorgestrel intrauterine contraceptive system over 5 years of use. Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol. 2017; 210: 22-8. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2016.11.022.
  18. Hall A.M., Kutler B.A. Intrauterine contraception in nulliparous women: a prospective survey. J. Fam. Plann. Reprod. Health Care. 2016; 42(1): 36-42. https://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jfprhc-2014-101046.
  19. Black A., Guilbert E., Costescu D., Dunn S., Fisher W., Kives S. et al. Canadian Contraception Consensus (Part 3 of 4): Chapter 7 - Intrauterine contraception. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. Can. 2016; 38(2): 182-222. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jogc.2015.12.002.
  20. Ассоциация организаций по клиническим исследованиям. Хельсинкская декларация Всемирной медицинской ассоциации. Принята на 18-й Генеральной Ассамблее ВМА, Хельсинки, Финляндия, июнь 1964 г., изменения внесены на 64-й Генеральной Ассамблее ВМА, Форталеза, Бразилия, октябрь 2013 г.
  21. Федеральное агентство по техническому регулированию и метрологии. Национальный стандарт Российской Федерации. ГОСТ Р. 523792005. Надлежащая клиническая практика. Официальное издание. М.: Стандартинформ; 2006. 39с.
  22. Nelson A.L., Apter D., Hauck B., Schmelter T., Rybowski S., Rosen K. et al. Two low-dose levonorgestrel intrauterine contraceptive systems: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet. Gynecol. 2013; 122(6): 1205-13. https://dx.doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000000019.
  23. Beatty M.N., Blumenthal P.D. The levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system: safety, efficacy, and patient acceptability. Ther. Clin. Risk Manag. 2009; 5(3): 561-74. https://dx.doi.org/10.2147/tcrm.s5624.
  24. Gemzell-Danielsson K., Ink P., Heikinheimo O. Safety and efficacy of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system. Expert Rev. Obstet. Gynecol. 2013; 8(3): 235-47. https://dx.doi.org/10.1586/eog.13.18.
  25. Borgatta L., Buhling K.J., Rybowski S., Roth K., Rosen K. A multicentre, open-label, randomized phase III study comparing a new levonorgestrel intrauterine contraceptive system (LNG-IUS 8) with combined oral contraception in young women of reproductive age. Eur. J. Contracept. Reprod. Health Care. 2016; 21(5): 372-9. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13625187.2016.1212987.
  26. Прилепская В.Н., Абакарова П.Р., Межевитинова Е.А., Довлетханова Э.Р., Назарова Н.М. Современные принципы консультирования в контрацепции. Гормональная контрацепция. Акушерство и гинекология. 2021; 3(Приложение): 17-22.
  27. Stephenson J., Shawe J., Panicker S., Brim a N., Cop as A., Sauer U. et al. Randomized trial of the effect of tailored versus standard use of the combined oral contraceptive pill on continuation rates at 1 year. Contraception. 2013; 88(4): 523-31. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2013.03.014.
  28. Berenson A.B., Rahman M. A randomized controlled study of two educational interventions on adherence with oral contraceptives and condoms. Contraception. 2012; 86(6): 716-24. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2013.03.014.

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies