» Articles » PMID: 21508749

Continuation and Satisfaction of Reversible Contraception

Overview
Journal Obstet Gynecol
Date 2011 Apr 22
PMID 21508749
Citations 185
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective: To estimate 12-month satisfaction and continuation rates of intrauterine device (IUD) and implant users enrolled in the Contraceptive CHOICE Project and compare these measures with women using the oral contraceptive pills (OCPs).

Methods: We analyzed 12-month data from the first 5,087 participants enrolled in a prospective cohort study of women in the St. Louis region offered contraception at no cost for 3 years. The primary purpose of CHOICE is to promote the use of long-acting reversible contraception (IUDs and implants) and to reduce unintended pregnancies in our region. This analysis includes those participants who received their baseline contraceptive method within 3 months of enrollment and who reached the 12-month follow-up telephone survey time point (n=4,167).

Results: Sixty-eight percent of our participants chose a long-acting reversible contraception method (45% levonorgestrel intrauterine system, 10% copper IUD, and 13% subdermal implant), 23% chose combined hormonal methods (11% OCPs, 10% vaginal ring, and 2% transdermal patch), and 8% chose depot medroxyprogesterone acetate. Long-acting reversible contraception users had higher 12-month continuation rates (86%) than OCP users (55%). The two IUDs had the highest 12-month continuation rates: levonorgestrel intrauterine system (88%) and copper IUD (84%). Women using the implant also had very high rates of continuation at 1 year (83%). Satisfaction mirrored continuation: more than 80% of users were satisfied with the IUD compared with 54% satisfied with OCPs.

Conclusion: IUDs and the subdermal implant have the highest rates of satisfaction and 12-month continuation. Given that long-acting reversible contraception methods have the highest contraceptive efficacy, these methods should be the first-line contraceptive methods offered to patients.

Citing Articles

Subdermal implants vs. levonorgestrel intrauterine devices outcomes in reproductive-aged women: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Oliveira J, Neves G, Pinhati M, de Oliveira F, Filho A Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2025; .

PMID: 40069520 DOI: 10.1007/s00404-025-07943-6.


Women's experience, satisfaction, and continuation with the levonogestrel-containing intrauterine system: A cross-sectional study.

Donmez A, Yesil Y Medicine (Baltimore). 2025; 103(52):e41063.

PMID: 39969376 PMC: 11687995. DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000041063.


Intrauterine Device Use and Perceptions Among Women in Tanzania-A Mixed Methods Study.

Massay C, Lafontan S, Rogathi J, Safari U, Sigalla G SAGE Open Nurs. 2024; 10:23779608241305782.

PMID: 39711855 PMC: 11660266. DOI: 10.1177/23779608241305782.


An in-vivo study of the safety of copper-containing intrauterine devices in 3.0 Tesla magnetic resonance imaging.

Moy J, Landon M, Vigilante J, Lehmann B, DeChambeau A, Rohlfing F Abdom Radiol (NY). 2024; 49(12):4592-4599.

PMID: 39023566 PMC: 11522044. DOI: 10.1007/s00261-024-04493-4.


Continuation of Reversible Contraception Following Enrollment in the Zika Contraception Access Network (Z-CAN) in Puerto Rico, 2016-2020.

Zapata L, Kortsmit K, Curtis K, Romero L, Hurst S, Lathrop E Stud Fam Plann. 2024; 55(2):105-125.

PMID: 38659169 PMC: 11299421. DOI: 10.1111/sifp.12262.


References
1.
Moreau C, Cleland K, Trussell J . Contraceptive discontinuation attributed to method dissatisfaction in the United States. Contraception. 2007; 76(4):267-72. DOI: 10.1016/j.contraception.2007.06.008. View

2.
Wong R, Bell R, 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(5):452-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.contraception.2009.03.021. View

3.
Rosenberg M, Waugh M . Oral contraceptive discontinuation: a prospective evaluation of frequency and reasons. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1998; 179(3 Pt 1):577-82. DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9378(98)70047-x. View

4.
McNutt L, Wu C, Xue X, Hafner J . Estimating the relative risk in cohort studies and clinical trials of common outcomes. Am J Epidemiol. 2003; 157(10):940-3. DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwg074. View

5.
Sangi-Haghpeykar H, Poindexter 3rd A, Bateman L, Ditmore J . Experiences of injectable contraceptive users in an urban setting. Obstet Gynecol. 1996; 88(2):227-33. DOI: 10.1016/0029-7844(96)00194-9. View