Cost-effectiveness analysis of levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) 52 mg versus other long-acting reversible contraceptives for contraception in Spain.

INTRODUCTION: Condoms and combined oral contraceptive pills are widely used in Spain with high failure rates. Long-Acting Reversible Contraceptive (LARC) methods offer better efficacy and adherence and reduce unintended pregnancies (UP) compared with short-acting reversible contraceptive (SARC) methods. OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost-effectiveness of LNG-IUS 52 mg (Mirena®) versus other LARC for contraception in Spain. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A Markov model with annual cycles and an eight-year time horizon was developed from the Spanish national healthcare system (NHS) perspective, considering costs for contraceptive method acquisition, health care resources (HCR) and UP. Effectiveness was based on failure and discontinuation rates. Sensitivity analyses were performed to test the model's robustness. RESULTS: LNG-IUS 52 mg (Mirena®) resulted in lower costs and fewer UP versus LNG-IUS 13.5 mg (Jaydess®), Implant (Implanon®) and Copper IUD. LNG-IUS 52 mg (Levosert®) prevented the same UP events at a higher cost. LNG-IUS 19.5 mg (Kyleena®) was the most effective option, due to a lower discontinuation rate. CONCLUSIONS: LNG-IUS 52 mg (Mirena®) is the least costly LARC, driven by lower acquisition costs and reduced HCR utilisation. Increasing LNG-IUS 52 mg (Mirena®) uptake in contraception could generate further cost savings for the Spanish NHS and reduce economic burden of UP.

Levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS; Mirena^®) is an effective and cost-saving long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARC) method compared with other similar methods in Spain over an eight-year time horizon, and Kyleena^® was the most effective option.

Use of Contraceptive Methods Among Women in the General Population and Female Gynecologists in Spain: the ELEGIAN Survey.

Background: The contraceptive preferences of obstetricians and gynecologists (OB/GYNs) are thought to influence the contraceptive counseling they provide. The purpose of this study was to assess contraceptive preferences of OB/GYNs and women in the general population (WGP) in the current Spanish contraceptive scenario. Materials and Methods: Anonymous online survey of 100 OB/GYNs and 1,217 WGP aged 23-49 years. Results: WGP were younger (35.3 ± 7.3 vs. 37.9 ± 6.2 years, respectively) and less likely to have stable partners (64.7% vs. 84.0%) and children (49.1% vs. 62.0%) (all p < 0.05 vs. OB/GYNs). Seventy-nine percent versus 82%, respectively, used contraceptive methods, with condoms used most frequently by WGP (37% vs. 22% by OB/GYNs; p < 0.05) and pills by OB/GYNs (26% vs. 21% by WGP; p > 0.05). Intrauterine devices (IUDs) were more frequently used by OB/GYNs (20% vs. 5%; p < 0.05), especially the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine devices (LNG-IUDs) (18% vs. 2.6%; p < 0.05). The highest-rated methods were condoms among WGP and LNG-IUDs among OB/GYNs. Effectiveness was the most valued attribute of contraceptive methods for both. Reasons related to convenience were the main reason for choosing IUDs. OB/GYNs prescribed the contraceptive method in 40% of cases. Conclusions: Our study reveals differences between female OB/GYNs and WGP in contraceptive methods use and rating. The use of LNG-IUDs was much higher among OB/GYNs.