Continuation and satisfaction of reversible contraception

Obstetrics and Gynecology

Volumn 117, Issue 5, 2011, Pages 1105-1113

  Peipert, Jeffrey F ^a   Zhao, Qiuhong ^b   Allsworth, Jenifer E ^b   Petrosky, Emiko ^b   Madden, Tessa ^b   Eisenberg, David ^b   Secura, Gina ^b  

^a WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COPPER INTRAUTERINE DEVICE; LEVONORGESTREL; MEDROXYPROGESTERONE ACETATE; ORAL CONTRACEPTIVE AGENT;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DATA ANALYSIS; DRUG EFFICACY; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; IMPLANT; INTRAUTERINE CONTRACEPTIVE DEVICE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; TELEPHONE; TRANSDERMAL PATCH; UNPLANNED PREGNANCY; VAGINA RING;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; CHILD; CONTRACEPTION; CONTRACEPTIVE AGENTS, FEMALE; CONTRACEPTIVE DEVICES, FEMALE; CONTRACEPTIVES, ORAL; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; INTRAUTERINE DEVICES; KAPLAN-MEIER ESTIMATE; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PROPORTIONAL HAZARDS MODELS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; TIME FACTORS; TRANSDERMAL PATCH; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 79955534404     PISSN: 00297844     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e31821188ad     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Mosher WD, Jones J. Use of contraception in the United States: 1982-2008. Vital Health Stat 23 2010;(29):1-44.
2. Gilliam ML, Neustadt A, Kozloski M, Mistretta S, Tilmon S, Godfrey E. Adherence and acceptability of the contraceptive ring compared with the pill among students: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 2010;115:503-10.
3. Rosenberg MJ, Waugh MS. Oral contraceptive discontinuation: a prospective evaluation of frequency and reasons. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1998;179(3 pt 1):577-82. (Pubitemid 28447229)
4. Picardo C, Ferreri S. Pharmacist-administered subcutaneous depot medroxyprogesterone acetate: a pilot randomized controlled trial. Contraception 2010;82:160-7.
5. Sangi-Haghpeykar H, Poindexter AN 3rd, Bateman L, Ditmore JR. Experiences of injectable contraceptive users in an urban setting. Obstet Gynecol 1996;88:227-33. (Pubitemid 26250297)
6. Westfall JM, Main DS, Barnard L. Continuation rates among injectable contraceptive users. Fam Plann Perspect 1996;28: 275-7. (Pubitemid 26414782)
7. Fleming KL, Sokoloff A, Raine TR. Attitudes and beliefs about the intrauterine device among teenagers and young women. Contraception 2010;82:178-82.
8. Madden T, Allsworth JE, Hladky KJ, Secura GM, Peipert JF. Intrauterine contraception in Saint Louis: a survey of obstetrician and gynecologists' knowledge and attitudes. Contraception 2010;81:112-6.
9. Hladky KJ, Allsworth JE, Madden T, Secura GM, Peipert JF. Women's knowledge about intrauterine contraception. Obstet Gynecol 2011;117:48-54.
10. Dehlendorf C, Ruskin R, Grumbach K, Vittinghoff E, Bibbins- Domingo K, Schillinger D, et al. Recommendations for intrauterine contraception: a randomized trial of the effects of patients' race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2010;203:319.e1-8.
11. Foster DG, Rostovtseva DP, Brindis CD, Biggs MA, Hulett D, Darney PD. Cost savings from the provision of specific methods of contraception in a publicly funded program. Am J Public Health 2009;99:446-51.
12. Secura GM, Allsworth JE, Madden T, Mullersman JL, Peipert JF. The Contraceptive CHOICE Project: reducing barriers to long-acting reversible contraception. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2010;203:115.e1-7.
13. McNutt LA, Wu C, Xue X, Hafner JP. Estimating the relative risk in cohort studies and clinical trials of common outcomes. Am J Epidemiol 2003;157:940-3. (Pubitemid 36555054)
14. Jones RK, Singh S, Finer LB, Frohwirth LF. Repeat abortion in the United States. Occasional Report No. 29. New York (NY): Guttmacher Institute; 2006.
15. Finer LB, Henshaw SK. Disparities in the rates of unintended pregnancy in the United States, 1994 and 2001. Perspect Sex Reprod Health 2006;38:90-6. (Pubitemid 43882311)
16. Frost JJ, Darroch JE. Factors associated with contraceptive choice and inconsistent method use, United States, 2004. Perspect Sex Reprod Health 2008;40:94-104.
17. Moreau C, Cleland K, Trussell J. Contraceptive discontinuation attributed to method dissatisfaction in the United States. Contraception 2007;76:267-72. (Pubitemid 47454520)
18. Fraser IS. Non-contraceptive health benefits of intrauterine hormonal systems. Contraception 2010;82:396-403.
19. Godfrey EM, Memmel LM, Neustadt A, Shah M, Nicosia A, Moorthie M, et al. Intrauterine contraception for adolescents aged 14-18 years: a multicenter randomized pilot study of levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system compared to the Copper T 380A. Contraception 2010;81:123-7.
20. Suhonen S, Haukkamaa M, Jakobsson T, Rauramo I. Clinical performance of a levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system and oral contraceptives in young nulliparous women: a comparative study. Contraception 2004;69:407-12. (Pubitemid 38510332)
21. Trussell J. Contraceptive efficacy. In: Hatcher RA, Trussell J, Nelson AL, Cates W, Stewart FH, Kowal D, editors. Contraceptive technology, 19th revised ed. New York (NY): Ardent Media; 2007:759.
22. Funk S, Miller MM, Mishell DR Jr, Archer DF, Poindexter A, Schmidt J, et al; Implanon US Study Group. Safety and efficacy of Implanon, a single-rod implantable contraceptive containing etonogestrel. Contraception 2005;71:319-26. (Pubitemid 40602307)
23. Flores JB, Balderas ML, Bonilla MC, Vazquez-Estrada L. Clinical experience and acceptability of the etonogestrel subdermal contraceptive implant. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2005;90: 228-33. (Pubitemid 41138922)
24. Wong RC, Bell RJ, Thunuguntla K, McNamee K, Vollenhoven B. Implanon users are less likely to be satisfied with their contraception after 6 months than IUD users. Contraception 2009;80:452-6.