COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RESEARCH SUPPORT, N.I.H., EXTRAMURAL
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Three-year continuation of reversible contraception.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this analysis was to estimate the 3-year continuation rates of long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARC) methods and to compare these rates to non-LARC methods.

STUDY DESIGN: The Contraceptive CHOICE Project (CHOICE) was a prospective cohort study that followed 9256 participants with telephone surveys at 3 and 6 months, then every 6 months for 2-3 years. We estimated 3-year continuation rates of baseline methods that were chosen at enrollment. The LARC methods include the 52-mg levonorgestrel intrauterine device; the copper intrauterine device, and the subdermal implant). These were then compared to rates to non-LARC hormonal methods (depot medroxyprogesterone acetate, oral contraceptive pills, contraceptive patch, and vaginal ring). Eligibility criteria for this analysis included participants who started their baseline chosen method by the 3-month survey. Participants who discontinued their method to attempt conception were censored. We used a Cox proportional hazard model to adjust for confounding and to estimate the hazard ratio for risk of discontinuation.

RESULTS: Our analytic sample consisted of 4708 CHOICE participants who met inclusion criteria. Three-year continuation rates were 69.8% for users of the levonorgestrel intrauterine device, 69.7% for copper intrauterine device users, and 56.2% for implant users. At 3 years, continuation was 67.2% among LARC users and 31.0% among non-LARC users (P < .001). After adjustment for age, race, education, socioeconomic status, parity, and history of sexually transmitted infection, the hazard ratio for risk of discontinuation was 3-fold higher among non-LARC method users than LARC users (adjusted hazard ratio, 3.08; 95% confidence interval, 2.80-3.39).

CONCLUSION: Three-year continuation of the 2 intrauterine devices approached 70%. Continuation of LARC methods was significantly higher than non-LARC methods.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app