Re: Intrauterine contraception as an alternative to interval tubal sterilization

Contraception

Volumn 78, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 84-85

  Marasinghe, Jeevan P ^a   Wijeyaratne, Chandrika N ^a  

^a De Soyza Hospital for Women   (Sri Lanka)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ETONOGESTREL; LEVONORGESTREL;

BIRTH CONTROL; CONTRACEPTIVE IMPLANT; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY; FEMALE CONTRACEPTIVE DEVICE; HIGH RISK PREGNANCY; HUMAN; INTRAUTERINE CONTRACEPTIVE DEVICE; LETTER; LEVONORGESTREL RELEASING SYSTEM; MATERNAL DISEASE; MENSTRUAL CYCLE; MENSTRUATION DISORDER; OVULATION; SIDE EFFECT; UTERINE TUBE STERILIZATION; WEIGHT GAIN;

CONTRACEPTION; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTRAUTERINE DEVICES, MEDICATED; STERILIZATION, TUBAL; UNITED STATES;

EID: 44949258872     PISSN: 00107824     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.contraception.2008.03.001     Document Type: Letter

References (4)

1. Grimes D.A., and Mishell Jr. D.R. Intrauterine contraception as an alternative to interval tubal sterilization. Contraception 77 (2008) 6-9
2. Weisberg E., and Fraser I. Australian women's experience with Implanon. Aust Fam Physician 34 (2005) 694-696
3. Croxatto H.B., Urbanscek J., Massai R., Coelingh Bennink H., and van Beek A.A. Multicentre efficacy and safety study of the single contraceptive implant Implanon. Implanon Study Group. Hum Reprod 14 (1999) 976-981
4. Funk S., Miller M.M., Mishell Jr. D.R., et al. Safety and efficacy of Implanon, a single-rod implantable contraceptive containing etonogestrel. Contraception 71 (2005) 319-326