Reproductive Planning: Short-Acting Reversible Contraceptives.

Short-acting reversible contraceptives (SARCs) are prescribed routinely by primary care clinicians. SARCs are among the most commonly prescribed contraceptive methods and include combined hormonal oral contraceptive pills, the combined hormonal transdermal patch, the combined hormonal vaginal ring, progestin-only pills, and the 3-month depot medroxyprogesterone acetate injection. To ensure safe prescribing and reduce barriers to receiving SARC methods, family physicians should be familiar with two evidence-based national contraceptive guidelines, the U.S. Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use (U.S. MEC) and the U.S. Selected Practice Recommendations for Contraceptive Use (U.S. SPR). SARCs have benefits in addition to pregnancy prevention; as such, these methods may be chosen for reasons other than contraception.

Oral manifestations in women using hormonal contraceptive methods: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the oral manifestations in women of reproductive age using hormonal contraceptive methods. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This review is based on the PRISMA statement. A literature search incorporated observational studies from the last 21 years. An investigative question was formulated using the PICO model, studies were selected, and a quality analysis was performed using the modified STROBE guidelines. A bibliometric analysis was performed, and the data were examined. RESULTS: Thirteen articles were included, with the majority evaluating periodontal status. Others analyzed factors such as the presence of alveolar osteitis, oral candidiasis, and salivary microbiome dysbiosis. Ten articles were deemed to have a low risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS: Hormonal contraceptives may increase the risk of alveolar osteitis following tooth extraction and increase the presence of the Candida species in the oral cavity. They also affect the periodontium, such as the frequent development of gingivitis, but do not lead to changes in the salivary microbiome. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The increasing number of women using hormonal contraceptives and the knowledge that these contraceptives can produce oral cavity alterations underscore the need to evaluate the oral manifestations found in these women.

A meta-analysis into the mediatory effects of family planning utilization on complications of pregnancy in women of reproductive age.

BACKGROUND: Despite conflicting findings in the current literature regarding the correlation between contraceptives and maternal health consequences, statistical analyses indicate that family planning may decrease the occurrence of such outcomes. Consequently, it is crucial to assess the capability of family planning to mitigate adverse maternal health outcomes. OBJECTIVES: This review investigates the effects of modern contraceptive use on maternal health. SEARCH METHODS: This systematic review is registered on Prospero (CRD42022332783). We searched numerous databases with an upper date limit of February 2022 and no geographical boundaries. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included observational studies, including cross-sectional, cohort, case-control studies, and non-RCT with a comparison group. We excluded systematic reviews, scoping reviews, narrative reviews, and meta-analyses from the body of this review. MAIN RESULTS: The review included nineteen studies, with five studies reporting a reduction in maternal mortality linked to increased access to family planning resources and contraceptive use. Another three studies examined the impact of contraception on the risk of preeclampsia and our analysis found that preeclampsia risk was lower by approximately 6% among contraceptive users (95% CI 0.82-1.13) compared to non-users. Two studies assessed the effect of hormonal contraceptives on postpartum glucose tolerance and found that low-androgen contraception was associated with a reduced risk of gestational diabetes (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.58-1.22), while DMPA injection was possibly linked to a higher risk of falling glucose status postpartum (OR 1.42, 95% CI 0.85-2.36). Two studies evaluated high-risk pregnancies and births in contraceptive users versus non-users, with the risk ratio being 30% lower among contraceptive users of any form (95% CI 0.61, 0.80). None of these results were statistically significant except the latter. In terms of adverse maternal health outcomes, certain contraceptives were found to be associated with ectopic pregnancy and pregnancy-related venous thromboembolism through additional analysis.

Abnormal Uterine Bleeding Associated With Hormonal Contraception.

Abnormal uterine bleeding is a common and bothersome symptom in people using hormonal contraception, and it can lead to discontinuation of reliable methods of contraception and unintended pregnancies. Clinicians should counsel individuals about the potential for abnormal bleeding at initiation of the contraceptive method. After considering and excluding other potential causes of abnormal uterine bleeding, clinicians can offer treatment options specific to each hormonal contraceptive method. This article includes algorithms to help clinicians treat abnormal uterine bleeding in people using levonorgestrel intrauterine devices, depo-medroxyprogesterone acetate, progestin implant, progestin-only pills, and combined hormonal contraception. For patients with levonorgestrel intrauterine devices, physicians should first ensure that the device is correctly placed within the uterus, then consider nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs as a first-line treatment for abnormal uterine bleeding; estradiol can be used if nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are ineffective. For depo-medroxyprogesterone acetate or progestin implant users, combined oral contraceptives or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs may be considered. For patients using norethindrone progestin-only pills, changing to drospirenone progesterone-only pills may help reduce the bleeding. In people using combined hormonal contraception, it may be helpful to increase estrogen content from 20 mcg to 35 mcg per day, decrease the hormone-free interval (from seven to four or five days) in people using cyclic contraception, or start a trial of low-dose doxycycline. For continuous combined contraception users, adding a hormone-free interval of four or five days can help regulate bleeding patterns.

Mental health conditions and contraception: current landscape, reproductive health and obstetric outcomes, and clinical guidance.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review presents the epidemiology of mental health conditions among reproductive aged people, common adverse reproductive outcomes, the hormonal profile of contraception and its relationship with psychiatric outcomes, and updated information for clinicians providing contraceptive counselling for this population. RECENT FINDINGS: There is variability among contraceptive behaviours and patterns across those who have mental health conditions, impacting reproductive, psychiatric, and perinatal outcomes. The endocrinology of hormonal contraceptives is well understood, however, the impacts of steroidal hormones on mental health outcomes continue to be less understood. Overall, hormonal contraceptives are safe to use among those with mental health conditions, and among those using selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors. Additional considerations are needed when prescribing contraception among people who may be at risk of poor adherence, who use certain classes of antidepressants, antipsychotics, antiepileptics, and who are <6 weeks postpartum. SUMMARY: Barriers to effective contraceptive use should be addressed and myths on negative psychiatric impacts of hormonal contraceptives should be dispelled. Healthcare clinicians should seek out opportunities to become proficient in contraception counselling to improve health outcomes among people with mental health conditions.

Hormones and thrombosis: the dark side of the moon.

BACKGROUND: The main drawback of oral contraceptives (OC) and hormone replacement therapy (HRT) is an increased risk of venous and, to a lesser extent, arterial thrombosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This narrative, case-based review describes the effect of available estrogens and progestogens on the hemostatic system and their potential impact on the risk of thrombosis. Clinical cases are used to illustrate different options for prescribing OC and HRT in the real-word. The aim is to offer discussion topics that could be helpful to guide the choice of different hormonal treatments over a woman's lifetime and in the presence of risk factors. RESULTS: We describe physio-pathological changes occurring during the administration of hormonal therapies. Furthermore, we analyze the risk of venous and arterial thrombosis associated with different products, routes of administration and additional risk factors. New hormonal preparations, such as estradiol combined with dienogest, as well as non-oral hormonal therapies, are suggested to decrease thrombotic risk significantly. DISCUSSION: The availability of many products and different routes of administration allow most women to safely use contraception, as well as HRT. We encourage careful counselling instead of inflexible or fearful behavior, as expanding options and choices will allow women to make the best decisions for their health.

NSAIDs and hormonal contraceptives are linked to VTE in women with no previous thrombotic disease.

SOURCE CITATION: Meaidi A, Mascolo A, Sessa M, et al. Venous thromboembolism with use of hormonal contraception and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs: nationwide cohort study. BMJ. 2023;382:e074450. 37673431.

Lower levels of the neuroprotective tryptophan metabolite, kynurenic acid, in users of estrogen contraceptives.

Changes in kynurenine metabolites are reported in users of estrogen containing contraception. We have assessed kynurenines, vitamin B6, vitamin B2 and the inflammation markers, C-reactive protein (CRP) and neopterin, in healthy, never-pregnant women between 18 and 40 years (n = 123) and related this to their use of hormonal contraception. The population included 58 women, who did not use hormonal contraceptives (non-users), 51 users of estrogen-containing contraceptives (EC-users), and 14 users of progestin only contraceptives (PC-users). EC-users had significantly lower plasma kynurenic acid (KA) and higher xanthurenic acid (XA) levels compared to non-users. Serum CRP was significantly higher and negatively associated with both vitamin B6 and B2 status in EC-user compared to non-users. No significant differences in any parameters were seen between PC-users and non-users (p > 0.1). The low KA and high XA concentration in users of estrogen containing contraception resemble the biochemical profile observed in vitamin B6 deficiency. The hormonal effect may result from interference with the coenzyme function of vitamin B6 and B2 for particular enzymes in the kynurenine metabolism. KA has been suggested to be neuroprotective and the significantly reduced concentration in EC-users may be of importance in the observed increased risk of mood disorders among users of oral contraceptives.

Comparison of thromboembolism outcomes in patients with sickle cell disease prescribed hormonal contraception.

Patients with sickle cell disease (SCD) are at a risk of thromboembolism (TE), and use of hormonal contraception can further increase that risk. This study aims to assess patterns of hormonal contraceptive use and compare risk of contraception-related TE between combined hormonal contraceptives (CHCs) and progestin-only contraceptives (POCs). Patients with SCD aged between 12 and 44 years with a new prescription of a hormonal contraceptive in the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Medicaid Analytic eXtract database (2006-2018) were followed up to 1 year. We identified 7173 new users: 44.6% initiated CHC and 55.4% initiated POC. Combined oral contraceptive pills (OCPs; 36.5%) and progestin-only depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (33.9%) were the most frequently prescribed agents. A total of 1.8% of contraception users had a new diagnosis of TE within 1 year of the first identified contraception prescription. There were no significant differences in TE event rates between CHC and POC users (17.2 and 24.7 events per 1000 person-years, respectively). In patients prescribed OCP, there were no differences in TE event rates based on estrogen dose or progestin generation. Transdermal patch had a 2.4-fold increased risk of TE as compared with that of OCP. Although limited by the retrospective study design and use of administrative claims data, this study found no significant differences in TE rates between new users of CHC and POC in patients with SCD. Careful evaluation of underlying TE risk factors should be considered for each patient with SCD before initiation of hormonal contraception.

The efficacy, safety, and tolerability of an estrogen-free oral contraceptive drospirenone 4 mg (24/4-day regimen) in obese users.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to compare contraceptive efficacy and safety of drospirenone 4 mg in a 24/4-day regimen in nonobese and obese users and describe pharmacokinetics according to bodyweight. STUDY DESIGN: We analyzed data from three drospirenone 4 mg trials (2 European and 1 United States) to report outcomes in nonobese (body mass index <30 kg/m2) and obese (body mass index ≥30 kg/m2) users. We used data from the US trial to calculate the Pearl Index (pregnancies per 100 woman-years) in nonbreastfeeding participants aged ≤35 years at enrollment for confirmed pregnancies. We assessed safety outcomes from all trials based on reported treatment-emergent adverse events. We evaluated pharmacokinetics by bodyweight in the US trial. RESULTS: The three trials combined comprised 2152 nonobese and 425 obese participants, including 590 nonobese and 325 obese participants in the US trial. Eight nonobese and four obese participants had confirmed pregnancies in the US trial, resulting in Pearl Indices of 3.0 (95% CI: 1.3-5.8) and 2.9 (95% CI: 0.8-7.3), respectively. Two-hundred forty-four (11.3%) nonobese and 39 (9.2%) obese participants discontinued due to a treatment-emergent adverse event. The pharmacokinetic analysis included 814 participants with a median weight of 73 (interquartile range 61-89) kg and median plasma drospirenone exposure (AUC0-24ss) of 661.3 (interquartile range 522-828) ng∙h/mL. Changing bodyweight from the median to the fifth percentile (51 kg) or 95th percentile (118 kg) changed drospirenone exposure (AUC0-24,ss) by 22.2% and -23.6%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Drospirenone 4 mg demonstrated similar contraceptive efficacy for both nonobese and obese users despite a difference in exposure based on bodyweight. IMPLICATIONS: Our limited comparison between obese and nonobese users of drospirenone-only oral contraception demonstrated no evidence that efficacy or discontinuation for adverse events differs between groups. Serum drospirenone levels vary by bodyweight and may correlate with bleeding outcomes.

Former long-term use of combined hormonal contraception and glucose metabolism disorders in perimenopausal women: A prospective, population-based cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Current use of combined hormonal contraceptives worsens glucose tolerance and increases the risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus at late fertile age, but the impact of their former use on the risk of glucose metabolism disorders is still controversial. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This was a prospective, longitudinal birth cohort study with long-term follow-up consisting of 5889 women. The cohort population has been followed at birth, and at ages of 1, 14, 31 and 46. In total, 3280 (55.7%) women were clinically examined and 2780 also underwent a 2-h oral glucose tolerance test at age 46. Glucose metabolism indices were analyzed in former combined hormonal contraceptive users (n = 1371) and former progestin-only contraceptive users (n = 52) and in women with no history of hormonal contraceptive use (n = 253). RESULTS: Compared with women with no history of hormonal contraceptive use, those who formerly used combined hormonal contraceptives for over 10 years had an increased risk of prediabetes (odds ratio [OR] 3.9, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.6-9.2) but not of type 2 diabetes mellitus. Former progestin-only contraceptive use was not associated with any glucose metabolism disorders. The results persisted after adjusting for socioeconomic status, smoking, alcohol consumption, parity, body mass index and use of cholesterol-lowering medication. CONCLUSIONS: Former long-term use of combined hormonal contraceptives was associated with a significantly increased risk of prediabetes in perimenopausal women, which potentially indicates a need of screening for glucose metabolism disorders in these women.

Pharmacist prescribed hormonal contraceptives in New York State: Is there a need and an interest?

BACKGROUND: Hormonal contraceptives are a popular option for pregnancy prevention and other indications and require a prescription. Since 2013, 24 states have given pharmacists legal authority to initiate self-administered hormonal contraceptives, allowing for direct pharmacy access (DPA). New York State (NYS) did not allow for DPA of any hormonal contraceptives during the survey period, but passed a bill in 2023 allowing pharmacists to dispense hormonal contraceptives in accordance with a nonpatient-specific order. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to characterize the experiences, perceptions, and knowledge of access to and DPA to hormonal contraceptives. METHODS: A survey was developed to gather responses to demographic- and opinion-related questions and administered online using the Pollfish survey platform. Participants were women between the ages of 16 and 44 years who lived in NYS. To ensure geographic representation, at least one response was gathered from each of the 27 NYS congressional districts. Chi-square tests were used to assess differences in hormonal contraceptive use by patient demographics. RESULTS: Most of the 500 respondents reported past (76.2%) or current/planned (76.8%) use of hormonal contraceptives. Older age (P = 0.033) and higher income (P = 0.0016) were associated with significantly greater rates of use. The most common challenges when visiting a provider for birth control included needing to schedule an appointment and wait times at the provider. Almost three-quarters of respondents (72.6%) were not aware that pharmacists could initiate contraceptives in other states, and 74.2% reported feeling comfortable with a pharmacist prescribing and dispensing hormonal contraceptives. CONCLUSION: Contraceptive initiation by pharmacists would be acceptable to most respondents, but there is room for increased acceptance based on patient education and experience. DPA to hormonal contraceptives may eliminate some of the barriers identified in this survey.

Hormonal Contraceptives Are Associated With an Increase in Incidence of Asthma in Women.

BACKGROUND: Use of exogenous female sex hormones is associated with the development of asthma, but the question of whether the effect is protective or harmful remains unresolved. OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether initiation of hormonal contraceptive (HC) treatment was associated with development of asthma. METHODS: We performed a register-based, exposure-matched cohort study including women who initiated HC treatment of any kind between 10 and 40 years of age and compared the incidence of asthma with women who did not initiate HCs. Asthma was defined as 2 redeemed prescriptions of inhaled corticosteroids within 2 years. Data were analyzed using Cox regression models adjusted for income and urbanization. RESULTS: We included 184,046 women with a mean age of 15.5 years (SD 1.5 y), in which 30,669 initiated HC treatment and 153,377 did not. We found that initiation of HCs was associated with an increased hazard ratio (HR) of developing new asthma by 1.78 (95% CI 1.58-2.00; P < .001). The cumulative risk of new asthma was 2.7% after 3 years among users of HCs compared with 1.5% in nonusers. In the different subtypes of HCs, second- and third-generation contraceptives carried significant associations (second-generation HR 1.76; 95% CI 1.52-2.03; P < .001; third-generation HR 1.62 95% CI 1.23-2.12; P < .001). The association with increased incidence was seen only in women younger than 18 years. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, first-time users of HCs had an increased incidence of asthma compared with nonusers. Clinicians prescribing HCs should be aware that airway symptoms may develop.

Combined hormonal contraceptive use is not protective against musculoskeletal conditions or injuries: a systematic review with data from 5 million females.

OBJECTIVE: Assess the association between combined hormonal contraceptives (CHC) use and musculoskeletal tissue pathophysiology, injuries or conditions. DESIGN: Systematic review with semiquantitative analyses and certainty of evidence assessment, guided by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL searched from inception to April 2022. ELIGIBILITY: Intervention and cohort studies that assessed the association between new or ongoing use of CHC and an outcome of musculoskeletal tissue pathophysiology, injury or condition in postpubertal premenopausal females. RESULTS: Across 50 included studies, we assessed the effect of CHC use on 30 unique musculoskeletal outcomes (75% bone related). Serious risk of bias was judged present in 82% of studies, with 52% adequately adjusting for confounding. Meta-analyses were not possible due to poor outcome reporting, and heterogeneity in estimate statistics and comparison conditions. Based on semiquantitative synthesis, there is low certainty evidence that CHC use was associated with elevated future fracture risk (risk ratio 1.02-1.20) and total knee arthroplasty (risk ratio 1.00-1.36). There is very low certainty evidence of unclear relationships between CHC use and a wide range of bone turnover and bone health outcomes. Evidence about the effect of CHC use on musculoskeletal tissues beyond bone, and the influence of CHC use in adolescence versus adulthood, is limited. CONCLUSION: Given a paucity of high certainty evidence that CHC use is protective against musculoskeletal pathophysiology, injury or conditions, it is premature and inappropriate to advocate, or prescribe CHC for these purposes. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: This review was registered on PROSPERO CRD42021224582 on 8 January 2021.

Combined and progestagen-only hormonal contraceptives and breast cancer risk: A UK nested case-control study and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Current or recent use of combined oral contraceptives (containing oestrogen+progestagen) has been associated with a small increase in breast cancer risk. Progestagen-only contraceptive use is increasing, but information on associated risks is limited. We aimed to assess breast cancer risk associated with current or recent use of different types of hormonal contraceptives in premenopausal women, with particular emphasis on progestagen-only preparations. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Hormonal contraceptive prescriptions recorded prospectively in a UK primary care database (Clinical Practice Research Datalink [CPRD]) were compared in a nested case-control study for 9,498 women aged <50 years with incident invasive breast cancer diagnosed in 1996 to 2017, and for 18,171 closely matched controls. On average, 7.3 (standard deviation [SD] 4.6) years of clinical records were available for each case and their matched controls prior to the date of diagnosis. Conditional logistic regression yielded odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of breast cancer by the hormonal contraceptive type last prescribed, controlled for age, GP practice, body mass index, number of recorded births, time since last birth, and alcohol intake. MEDLINE and Embase were searched for observational studies published between 01 January 1995 and 01 November 2022 that reported on the association between current or recent progestagen-only contraceptive use and breast cancer risk in premenopausal women. Fixed effects meta-analyses combined the CPRD results with previously published results from 12 observational studies for progestagen-only preparations. Overall, 44% (4,195/9,498) of women with breast cancer and 39% (7,092/18,171) of matched controls had a hormonal contraceptive prescription an average of 3.1 (SD 3.7) years before breast cancer diagnosis (or equivalent date for controls). About half the prescriptions were for progestagen-only preparations. Breast cancer ORs were similarly and significantly raised if the last hormonal contraceptive prescription was for oral combined, oral progestagen-only, injected progestagen, or progestagen-releasing intrauterine devices (IUDs): ORs = 1.23 (95% CI [1.14 to 1.32]; p < 0.001), 1.26 (95% CI [1.16 to 1.37]; p < 0.001), 1.25 (95% CI [1.07 to 1.45]; p = 0.004), and 1.32 (95% CI [1.17 to 1.49]; p < 0.001), respectively. Our meta-analyses yielded significantly raised relative risks (RRs) for current or recent use of progestagen-only contraceptives: oral = 1.29 (95% CI [1.21 to 1.37]; heterogeneity χ25 = 6.7; p = 0.2), injected = 1.18 (95% CI [1.07 to 1.30]; heterogeneity χ28 = 22.5; p = 0.004), implanted = 1.28 (95% CI [1.08 to 1.51]; heterogeneity χ23 = 7.3; p = 0.06), and IUDs = 1.21 (95% CI [1.14 to 1.28]; heterogeneity χ24 = 7.9; p = 0.1). When the CPRD results were combined with those from previous published findings (which included women from a wider age range), the resulting 15-year absolute excess risk associated with 5 years use of oral combined or progestagen-only contraceptives in high-income countries was estimated at: 8 per 100,000 users from age 16 to 20 years and 265 per 100,000 users from age 35 to 39 years. The main limitation of the study design was that, due to the nature of the CPRD data and most other prescription databases, information on contraceptive use was recorded during a defined period only, with information before entry into the database generally being unavailable. This means that although our findings provide evidence about the short-term associations between hormonal contraceptives and breast cancer risk, they do not provide information regarding longer-term associations, or the impact of total duration of contraceptive use on breast cancer risk. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides important new evidence that current or recent use of progestagen-only contraceptives is associated with a slight increase in breast cancer risk, which does not appear to vary by mode of delivery, and is similar in magnitude to that associated with combined hormonal contraceptives. Given that the underlying risk of breast cancer increases with advancing age, the absolute excess risk associated with use of either type of oral contraceptive is estimated to be smaller in women who use it at younger rather than at older ages. Such risks need be balanced against the benefits of using contraceptives during the childbearing years.