Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||A multicenter randomized clinical trial of one-rod etonogestrel and two-rod levonorgestrel contraceptive implants with nonrandomized copper-IUD controls: Methodology and insertion data|
Ndema Abu Habib
Organisation Mondiale de la Sante
Instituto Chileno de Medicina Reproductiva
Glaxosmithkline Biologicals S.A.
University of California, Davis
University of Southern California
|Citation:||Contraception. Vol.87, No.1 (2013), 113-120|
|Abstract:||Background: Comparative data on etonogestrel and two-rod levonorgestrel contraceptive implants are lacking. Study Design: A multicenter, open, parallel-group trial with random allocation of implants was performed. For every second implant user, an age-matched woman choosing an intrauterine device (IUD) (TCu380A) was admitted. Methods and data on implant/IUD insertion and 6-week follow-up are reported. Results: A total of 2008 women were randomized to an implant, and 974 women were enrolled in the IUD group. Results from 997 etonogestrel implant users, 997 levonorgestrel implant users and 971 IUD users were analyzed. In the etonogestrel and levonorgestrel groups, respectively, mean insertion durations were 51 (SD 50.2) s and 88 (SD 60.8) s; complication rates at insertion were 0.8% and 0.2%; and at follow-up, 27.2% and 26.7% of women, respectively, had signs or symptoms at the insertion site. At follow-up within 6 weeks after insertion, all implants were in situ, while 2.1% of IUDs were expelled. Conclusion: Performance of etonogestrel and levonorgestrel implants at insertion and within the first 6 weeks is similar. Short-term (6 weeks) continuation rates appear higher for implants than TCu380A. © 2013 Elsevier Inc.|
|Appears in Collections:||Scopus 2011-2015|
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.