The cost-effectiveness of a long-acting reversible contraceptive (Implanon®) relative to oral contraception in a community setting

Contraception

Volumn 79, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 304-309

  Lipetz, Clare ^a   Phillips, Ceri J ^b   Fleming, Charlotte F ^a  

^a ANEURIN BEVAN UNIVERSITY HEALTH BOARD   (United Kingdom)

^b SWANSEA UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Community services; Cost effectiveness; Implanon ; Long acting reversible contraception (LARC)

Indexed keywords

CONTRACEPTIVE AGENT; ETONOGESTREL; LONG ACTING DRUG; LONG ACTING REVERSIBLE CONTRACEPTIVE AGENT; ORAL CONTRACEPTIVE AGENT; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTICLE; COMMUNITY CARE; CONTRACEPTION; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DRUG COST; DRUG IMPLANT; FEMALE; HORMONAL CONTRACEPTION; HUMAN; ORAL CONTRACEPTION; PREGNANCY; SEXUAL HEALTH; UNITED KINGDOM;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; CASE-CONTROL STUDIES; COHORT STUDIES; CONTRACEPTIVE AGENTS, FEMALE; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DESOGESTREL; FEMALE; GREAT BRITAIN; HUMANS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 61449223483     PISSN: 00107824     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.contraception.2008.11.003     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. Trussell J., Leveque J.A., Koenig J.D., et al. The economic value of contraception: a comparison of 15 methods. Am J Public Health 85 (1995) 494-503
2. Department of Health Sexual Health and HIV Team: findings of the baseline review of contraceptive services May 2007. www.dh.gov/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publication/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_074727
3. National Cost Impact Report (2005), National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, London. http://www.nice.org.uk/Guidance/CG30/CostReport/pdf/English http://www.nice.org.uk/Guidance/CG30/CostReport/pdf/English
4. Department of Health Statistical Bulletin, Abortion Statistics, England and Wales; 2006. http://www.statistics.gov.uk/downloads/theme_health/Conceptions2006/annual_conceptions_2006.xls [Accessed 28 September 2008].
5. http://www.dh.gov.uk/prod_consum_dh/groups/dh_digitalassets/documents/digitalasset/dh_075705.pdf [Accessed 28 September 2008].
6. National Collaborating Centre for Women's and Children's Health. Long-acting reversible contraception: The effective and appropriate use of long-acting reversible contraception (2005), RCOG Press, London. http://www.nice.org.uk/Guidance/CG30/Guidance/pdf/English http://www.nice.org.uk/Guidance/CG30/Guidance/pdf/English
7. Armstrong N., Cavey C., and Donaldson C. The economics of sexual health (2005), Family Planning Association, London
8. French RS, Cowan FM, Mansour DJ, et al. Implantable contraceptives (subdermal implants and hormonally impregnated intrauterine systems) versus other forms of reversible contraceptives: two systematic reviews to assessed relative effectiveness, acceptability, tolerability and cost-effectiveness. Health Technol Assessed 2000;4(7)i-v:1-107.
9. Statistical Bulletin/Buletin Ystadegol. Teenage conceptions in Wales 2005. Dec 2007. http://www.statswales.wales.gov.uk/tableviewer/document/aspx?FileId=1931 [Accessed 28 September 2008].
10. Lipetz C, Phillips CJ, Fleming C. The actual cost of providing a long acting reversible contraceptive: a study of Implanon® cost. J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care in print.
11. Mavranezouli I. The cost-effectiveness of long-acting reversible contraceptive methods in the UK: analysis based on a decision-analytic model developed for a National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) clinical practice guideline. Hum Repro 23 6 (2008) 1338-1345
12. Varney S., and Guest J. Relative cost-effectiveness of DepoProvera injection, Implanon and Mirena in reversible long term hormonal contraception in the UK. Pharmacoeconomics 22 (2004) 1141-1151