Use of effective contraception following provision of the progestogen-only pill for women presenting to community pharmacies for emergency contraception (Bridge-It): a pragmatic cluster-randomised crossover trial.

BACKGROUND: Unless women start effective contraception after oral emergency contraception, they remain at risk of unintended pregnancy. Most women in the UK obtain emergency contraception from community pharmacies. We hypothesised that pharmacist provision of the progestogen-only pill as a bridging interim method of contraception with emergency contraception plus an invitation to a sexual and reproductive health clinic, in which all methods of contraception are available, would result in increased subsequent use of effective contraception. METHODS: We did a pragmatic cluster-randomised crossover trial in 29 UK pharmacies among women receiving levonorgestrel emergency contraception. Women aged 16 years or older, not already using hormonal contraception, not on medication that could interfere with the progestogen-only pill, and willing to give contact details for follow-up were invited to participate. In the intervention group, women received a 3-month supply of the progestogen-only pill (75 µg desogestrel) plus a rapid access card to a participating sexual and reproductive health clinic. In the control group, pharmacists advised women to attend their usual contraceptive provider. The order in which each pharmacy provided the intervention or control was randomly assigned using a computer software algorithm. The primary outcome was the use of effective contraception (hormonal or intrauterine) at 4 months. This study is registered, ISRCTN70616901 (complete). FINDINGS: Between Dec 19, 2017, and June 26, 2019, 636 women were recruited to the intervention group (316 [49·6%], mean age 22·7 years [SD 5·7]) or the control group (320 [50·3%], 22·6 years [5·1]). Three women (one in the intervention group and two in the control group) were excluded after randomisation. 4-month follow-up data were available for 406 (64%) participants, 25 were lost to follow-up, and two participants no longer wanted to participate in the study. The proportion of women using effective contraception was 20·1% greater (95% CI 5·2-35·0) in the intervention group (mean 58·4%, 48·6-68·2), than in the control group (mean 40·5%, 29·7-51·3 [adjusted for recruitment period, treatment group, and centre]; p=0·011).The difference remained significant after adjusting for age, current sexual relationship, and history of effective contraception use, and was robust to the effect of missing data (assuming missingness at random). No serious adverse events occurred. INTERPRETATION: Provision of a supply of the progestogen-only pill with emergency contraception from a community pharmacist, along with an invitation to a sexual and reproductive health clinic, results in a clinically meaningful increase in subsequent use of effective contraception. Widely implemented, this practice could prevent unintended pregnancies after use of emergency contraception. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research (Health Technology Assessment Programme project 15/113/01).

TRPV4 is involved in levonorgestrel-induced reduction in oviduct ciliary beating.

Previous studies revealed the increasing risk of tubal pregnancy following failure of levonorgestrel (LNG)-induced emergency contraception, which was attributed to the reduced ciliary motility in response to LNG. However, understanding of the mechanism of LNG-induced reduction in the ciliary beat frequency (CBF) is limited. The transient receptor potential vanilloid (TRPV) 4 channel is located widely in the female reproductive tract and generates an influx of Ca2+ following its activation under normal physiological conditions, which regulates the CBF. The present study aimed to explore whether LNG reduced the CBF in the Fallopian tubes by modulating TRPV4 channels, leading to embryo retention in the Fallopian tubes and subsequent tubal pregnancy. The study provided evidence that the expression of TRPV4 was downregulated in the Fallopian tubes among patients with tubal pregnancy and negatively correlated with the serum level of progesterone. LNG downregulated the expression of TRPV4, limiting the calcium influx to reduce the CBF in mouse oviducts. Furthermore, the distribution of ciliated cells and the morphology of cilia did not change following the administration of LNG. LNG-induced reduction in the CBF and embryo retention in the Fallopian tubes and in mouse oviducts were partially reversed by the progesterone receptor antagonist RU486 or the TRPV4 agonist 4α-phorbol 12,13-didecanoate (4α-PDD). The results indicated that LNG could downregulate the expression of TRPV4 to reduce the CBF in both humans and mice, suggesting the possible mechanism of tubal pregnancy. © 2019 The Authors. The Journal of Pathology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland.

The use of emergency contraceptive pills in India: A meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Unplanned pregnancies are a major public health concern. In India, 33% of an estimated 48.1 million pregnancies end in induced abortions. Emergency contraceptive pills (ECPs) can prevent pregnancy after sexual intercourse, have been part of India's family planning program since 2002-2003 and are available as over-the-counter drugs. While there are concerns about the overuse of ECPs, the pattern of use of ECPs in India is unknown. OBJECTIVES: The objective is to determine the proportion of women who have ever used ECPs and repeatedly used ECPs and also to assess the reasons for use and nonuse of EC pills along with factors associated with the use. METHODS: A systematic review of ECP use in India was conducted by electronically searching three databases-PubMed, Popline, and Google Scholar. All studies were published between 2001 and 2017, and the electronic search was last conducted in July 2018. The proportion of use was calculated using meta-analysis, and the other factors were assessed by narratively synthesizing the findings. Thirty-three articles met the inclusion criteria. RESULTS: The pooled proportion of women who ever used ECPs was 6% (95% confidence interval, 0.03-0.10). The proportion of repeat use ranged from 12% to 69%. Five studies reported reasons for not using ECPs, and the most common reasons were religious/cultural beliefs followed by fear of side effects and inadequate knowledge. Studies to understand sociodemographic and other factors affecting the use of ECPs in India are lacking. There are significant concerns about the quality of the studies. The definition of repeat use of ECPs is inconsistent across papers. Furthermore, judgmental attitudes of health-care providers were apparent in some papers. CONCLUSION: The review highlights important research and program gaps.

Interventions for emergency contraception.

BACKGROUND: Emergency contraception (EC) is using a drug or copper intrauterine device (Cu-IUD) to prevent pregnancy shortly after unprotected intercourse. Several interventions are available for EC. Information on the comparative effectiveness, safety and convenience of these methods is crucial for reproductive healthcare providers and the women they serve. This is an update of a review previously published in 2009 and 2012. OBJECTIVES: To determine which EC method following unprotected intercourse is the most effective, safe and convenient to prevent pregnancy. SEARCH METHODS: In February 2017 we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Popline and PubMed, The Chinese biomedical databases and UNDP/UNFPA/WHO/World Bank Special Programme on Human Reproduction (HRP) emergency contraception database. We also searched ICTRP and ClinicalTrials.gov as well as contacting content experts and pharmaceutical companies, and searching reference lists of appropriate papers. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials including women attending services for EC following a single act of unprotected intercourse were eligible. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane. The primary review outcome was observed number of pregnancies. Side effects and changes of menses were secondary outcomes. MAIN RESULTS: We included 115 trials with 60,479 women in this review. The quality of the evidence for the primary outcome ranged from moderate to high, and for other outcomes ranged from very low to high. The main limitations were risk of bias (associated with poor reporting of methods), imprecision and inconsistency.Comparative effectiveness of different emergency contraceptive pills (ECP)Levonorgestrel was associated with fewer pregnancies than Yuzpe (estradiol-levonorgestrel combination) (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.84, 6 RCTs, n = 4750, I2 = 23%, high-quality evidence). This suggests that if the chance of pregnancy using Yuzpe is assumed to be 29 women per 1000, the chance of pregnancy using levonorgestrel would be between 11 and 24 women per 1000.Mifepristone (all doses) was associated with fewer pregnancies than Yuzpe (RR 0.14, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.41, 3 RCTs, n = 2144, I2 = 0%, high-quality evidence). This suggests that if the chance of pregnancy following Yuzpe is assumed to be 25 women per 1000 women, the chance following mifepristone would be between 1 and 10 women per 1000.Both low-dose mifepristone (less than 25 mg) and mid-dose mifepristone (25 mg to 50 mg) were probably associated with fewer pregnancies than levonorgestrel (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.99, 14 RCTs, n = 8752, I2 = 0%, high-quality evidence; RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.83, 27 RCTs, n = 6052, I2 = 0%, moderate-quality evidence; respectively). This suggests that if the chance of pregnancy following levonorgestrel is assumed to be 20 women per 1000, the chance of pregnancy following low-dose mifepristone would be between 10 and 20 women per 1000; and that if the chance of pregnancy following levonorgestrel is assumed to be 35 women per 1000, the chance of pregnancy following mid-dose mifepristone would be between 16 and 29 women per 1000.Ulipristal acetate (UPA) was associated with fewer pregnancies than levonorgestrel (RR 0.59; 95% CI 0.35 to 0.99, 2 RCTs, n = 3448, I2 = 0%, high-quality evidence).Comparative effectiveness of different ECP dosesIt was unclear whether there was any difference in pregnancy rate between single-dose levonorgestrel (1.5 mg) and the standard two-dose regimen (0.75 mg 12 hours apart) (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.33, 3 RCTs, n = 6653, I2 = 0%, moderate-quality evidence).Mid-dose mifepristone was associated with fewer pregnancies than low-dose mifepristone (RR 0.73; 95% CI 0.55 to 0.97, 25 RCTs, n = 11,914, I2 = 0%, high-quality evidence).Comparative effectiveness of Cu-IUD versus mifepristoneThere was no conclusive evidence of a difference in the risk of pregnancy between the Cu-IUD and mifepristone (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.04 to 2.74, 2 RCTs, n = 395, low-quality evidence).Adverse effectsNausea and vomiting were the main adverse effects associated with emergency contraception. There is probably a lower risk of nausea (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.76, 3 RCTs, n = 2186 , I2 = 59%, moderate-quality evidence) or vomiting (RR 0.12, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.20, 3 RCTs, n = 2186, I2 = 0%, high-quality evidence) associated with mifepristone than with Yuzpe. levonorgestrel is probably associated with a lower risk of nausea (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.44, 6 RCTs, n = 4750, I2 = 82%, moderate-quality evidence), or vomiting (RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.35, 5 RCTs, n = 3640, I2 = 78%, moderate-quality evidence) than Yuzpe. Levonorgestrel users were less likely to have any side effects than Yuzpe users (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.86; 1 RCT, n = 1955, high-quality evidence). UPA users were more likely than levonorgestrel users to have resumption of menstruation after the expected date (RR 1.65, 95% CI 1.42 to 1.92, 2 RCTs, n = 3593, I2 = 0%, high-quality evidence). Menstrual delay was more common with mifepristone than with any other intervention and appeared to be dose-related. Cu-IUD may be associated with higher risks of abdominal pain than mifepristone (18 events in 95 women using Cu-IUD versus no events in 190 women using mifepristone, low-quality evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Levonorgestrel and mid-dose mifepristone (25 mg to 50 mg) were more effective than Yuzpe regimen. Both mid-dose (25 mg to 50 mg) and low-dose mifepristone(less than 25 mg) were probably more effective than levonorgestrel (1.5 mg). Mifepristone low dose (less than 25 mg) was less effective than mid-dose mifepristone. UPA may be more effective than levonorgestrel.Levonorgestrel users had fewer side effects than Yuzpe users, and appeared to be more likely to have a menstrual return before the expected date. UPA users were probably more likely to have a menstrual return after the expected date. Menstrual delay was probably the main adverse effect of mifepristone and seemed to be dose-related. Cu-IUD may be associated with higher risks of abdominal pain than ECPs.

Interventions for emergency contraception.

BACKGROUND: Emergency contraception (EC) is using a drug or copper intrauterine device (Cu-IUD) to prevent pregnancy shortly after unprotected intercourse. Several interventions are available for EC. Information on the comparative effectiveness, safety and convenience of these methods is crucial for reproductive healthcare providers and the women they serve. This is an update of a review previously published in 2009 and 2012. OBJECTIVES: To determine which EC method following unprotected intercourse is the most effective, safe and convenient to prevent pregnancy. SEARCH METHODS: In February 2017 we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Popline and PubMed, The Chinese biomedical databases and UNDP/UNFPA/WHO/World Bank Special Programme on Human Reproduction (HRP) emergency contraception database. We also searched ICTRP and ClinicalTrials.gov as well as contacting content experts and pharmaceutical companies, and searching reference lists of appropriate papers. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials including women attending services for EC following a single act of unprotected intercourse were eligible. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane. The primary review outcome was observed number of pregnancies. Side effects and changes of menses were secondary outcomes. MAIN RESULTS: We included 115 trials with 60,479 women in this review. The quality of the evidence for the primary outcome ranged from moderate to high, and for other outcomes ranged from very low to high. The main limitations were risk of bias (associated with poor reporting of methods), imprecision and inconsistency. Comparative effectiveness of different emergency contraceptive pills (ECP)Levonorgestrel was associated with fewer pregnancies than Yuzpe (estradiol-levonorgestrel combination) (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.84, 6 RCTs, n = 4750, I2 = 23%, high-quality evidence). This suggests that if the chance of pregnancy using Yuzpe is assumed to be 29 women per 1000, the chance of pregnancy using levonorgestrel would be between 11 and 24 women per 1000.Mifepristone (all doses) was associated with fewer pregnancies than Yuzpe (RR 0.14, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.41, 3 RCTs, n = 2144, I2 = 0%, high-quality evidence). This suggests that if the chance of pregnancy following Yuzpe is assumed to be 25 women per 1000 women, the chance following mifepristone would be between 1 and 10 women per 1000.Both low-dose mifepristone (less than 25 mg) and mid-dose mifepristone (25 mg to 50 mg) were probably associated with fewer pregnancies than levonorgestrel (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.99, 14 RCTs, n = 8752, I2 = 0%, high-quality evidence; RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.83, 27 RCTs, n = 6052, I2 = 0%, moderate-quality evidence; respectively). This suggests that if the chance of pregnancy following levonorgestrel is assumed to be 20 women per 1000, the chance of pregnancy following low-dose mifepristone would be between 10 and 20 women per 1000; and that if the chance of pregnancy following levonorgestrel is assumed to be 35 women per 1000, the chance of pregnancy following mid-dose mifepristone would be between 16 and 29 women per 1000.Ulipristal acetate (UPA) was associated with fewer pregnancies than levonorgestrel (RR 0.59; 95% CI 0.35 to 0.99, 2 RCTs, n = 3448, I2 = 0%, high-quality evidence). Comparative effectiveness of different ECP dosesIt was unclear whether there was any difference in pregnancy rate between single-dose levonorgestrel (1.5 mg) and the standard two-dose regimen (0.75 mg 12 hours apart) (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.33, 3 RCTs, n = 6653, I2 = 0%, moderate-quality evidence).Mid-dose mifepristone was associated with fewer pregnancies than low-dose mifepristone (RR 0.73; 95% CI 0.55 to 0.97, 25 RCTs, n = 11,914, I2 = 0%, high-quality evidence). Comparative effectiveness of Cu-IUD versus mifepristoneThere was no conclusive evidence of a difference in the risk of pregnancy between the Cu-IUD and mifepristone (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.04 to 2.74, 2 RCTs, n = 395, low-quality evidence). Adverse effectsNausea and vomiting were the main adverse effects associated with emergency contraception. There is probably a lower risk of nausea (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.76, 3 RCTs, n = 2186 , I2 = 59%, moderate-quality evidence) or vomiting (RR 0.12, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.20, 3 RCTs, n = 2186, I2 = 0%, high-quality evidence) associated with mifepristone than with Yuzpe. levonorgestrel is probably associated with a lower risk of nausea (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.44, 6 RCTs, n = 4750, I2 = 82%, moderate-quality evidence), or vomiting (RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.35, 5 RCTs, n = 3640, I2 = 78%, moderate-quality evidence) than Yuzpe. Levonorgestrel users were less likely to have any side effects than Yuzpe users (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.86; 1 RCT, n = 1955, high-quality evidence). UPA users were more likely than levonorgestrel users to have resumption of menstruation after the expected date (RR 1.65, 95% CI 1.42 to 1.92, 2 RCTs, n = 3593, I2 = 0%, high-quality evidence). Menstrual delay was more common with mifepristone than with any other intervention and appeared to be dose-related. Cu-IUD may be associated with higher risks of abdominal pain than mifepristone (18 events in 95 women using Cu-IUD versus no events in 190 women using mifepristone, low-quality evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Levonorgestrel and mid-dose mifepristone (25 mg to 50 mg) were more effective than Yuzpe regimen. Both mid-dose (25 mg to 50 mg) and low-dose mifepristone(less than 25 mg) were probably more effective than levonorgestrel (1.5 mg). Mifepristone low dose (less than 25 mg) was less effective than mid-dose mifepristone. UPA was more effective than levonorgestrel.Levonorgestrel users had fewer side effects than Yuzpe users, and appeared to be more likely to have a menstrual return before the expected date. UPA users were probably more likely to have a menstrual return after the expected date. Menstrual delay was probably the main adverse effect of mifepristone and seemed to be dose-related. Cu-IUD may be associated with higher risks of abdominal pain than ECPs.

Emergency contraceptive pill safety profile. Comparison of the results of a follow-up study to those coming from spontaneous reporting.

BACKGROUND: The emergency contraceptive pill (ECP) containing levonorgestrel is dispensed without a prescription in Spain since 2009. An easy access could diminish unwanted pregnancies; however, there is a risk of misuse and, in any case, of developing some adverse events. The aim of the present study is to further learn the adverse effects of this ECP. METHODS: An ad hoc follow-up study was carried out in three community pharmacies in a city of Central Spain; the sample was composed of those women asking for the ECP; they were interviewed by telephone after at least a month since the last menses. We completed the safety profile obtained with that coming from spontaneous reporting in Spain. RESULTS: Out of 139 women surveyed, 113 developed any adverse event--two considered as severe; the most frequently reported events were menstrual disturbances, which accounted for 21% of all events. Through spontaneous reporting, 36 cases of whatever adverse events related to levonorgestrel as ECP were identified. Twenty-five cases were considered as severe. Both types of reaction and severity were significantly different in the follow-up study and in the spontaneous reporting. Some of the reactions identified, such as miscarriage, febrile neutropenia, and porphyria, are not included in the Summary of Product Characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Levonorgestrel as an ECP is mostly safe. Attention should be paid to some severe events and particularly to those risk factors for them to appear. Combining spontaneous reporting with an ad hoc follow-up study, the whole safety profile of a given medication can be obtained.

Repeated use of pre- and postcoital hormonal contraception for prevention of pregnancy.

BACKGROUND: Repeated use of postcoital hormonal contraception is not currently recommended due to the higher risk of side effects and lower contraceptive effectiveness compared to other modern methods of contraception. However, emerging evidence indicates renewed interest in a regular coitally-dependent method of oral contraception. We evaluated the existing data on safety and effectiveness of pericoital use of levonorgestrel and other hormonal drugs to prevent pregnancy. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness and safety of repeated use of pre- and postcoital hormonal contraception for pregnancy prevention. SEARCH METHODS: We searched until 1 September 2014 for trials that tested repeated pre- and postcoital use of hormonal drugs for pregnancy prevention. Databases included CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and POPLINE. We searched for current trials via ClinicalTrials.gov and ICTRP. For the initial review, we also searched EMBASE, CINAHL, and LILACS, and wrote to researchers to identify other trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: We considered published and unpublished studies of repeated postcoital or immediately precoital use of hormonal drugs for contraception with pregnancy as an outcome. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently confirmed eligibility and extracted data from the included studies. We calculated confidence intervals (CI) around individual study Pearl indices using a Poisson distribution. We presented individual study estimates and pooled estimates and their 95% CI, where appropriate. MAIN RESULTS: We found 22 trials that evaluated pericoital use of LNG and other hormonal drugs on a regular basis to prevent pregnancy. The studies included a total of 12,400 participants, and were conducted in Europe, Asia, and the Americas. The drugs and doses evaluated included levonorgestrel (LNG) 0.75 mg (11 studies), LNG in doses other than 0.75 mg (4 trials), and hormones other than LNG (7 trials). Outcomes included pregnancy rates, discontinuation, side effects, and acceptability.Pericoital levonorgestrel was reasonably efficacious and safe. The pooled Pearl Index for the 0.75 mg dose of LNG was 5.4 per 100 woman-years (95% CI 4.1 to 7.0). The pooled Pearl Index for all doses of LNG was 5.0 per 100 woman-years (95% CI 4.4 to 5.6). Other hormonal drugs appeared promising but most of them were not studied extensively. Menstrual irregularities were the most common side effects reported. However, the studies provided no consistent evidence of a relationship between bleeding abnormalities and either frequency of pill intake or total dose of the drug. Non-menstrual side effects were reportedly mild and not tabulated in most studies. Most women liked the pericoital method in spite of frequent menstrual irregularities. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The studies of pericoital LNG regimens provided promising results but many had serious methodological issues. Most reports were decades old and provided limited information. However, we considered the evidence to be moderate quality because of the large number of participants from diverse populations, the low pregnancy rates, and the consistent results across studies. Rigorous research is still needed to confirm the efficacy and safety of pericoital use of LNG as a primary means of contraception among women with infrequent intercourse. If the method is shown to be efficacious, safe and acceptable, the results may warrant revision of the current World Health Organization recommendations and marketing strategies.

An update on emergency contraception.

Emergency contraception decreases the risk of unintended pregnancy after unprotected sexual intercourse or after suspected failure of routine contraception (e.g., a condom breaking). Oral methods include combined contraceptive pills (i.e., Yuzpe method), single- or split-dose levonorgestrel, and ulipristal. The Yuzpe method and levonorgestrel are U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved for use 72 hours postcoitus, whereas the newest method, ulipristal, is approved for up to 120 hours postcoitus. The copper intrauterine device may be used as emergency contraception up to seven days after unprotected intercourse. It is nonhormonal and has the added benefit of long-term contraception. Advanced provision of emergency contraception may be useful for all patients, and for persons using ulipristal because it is available only by prescription. Physicians should counsel patients on the use and effectiveness of emergency contraception, the methods available, and the benefits of routine and consistent contraception use.

Nowadays which emergency contraception? Comparison between past and present: latest news in terms of clinical efficacy, side effects and contraindications.

Despite many highly effective methods of contraception are available nowadays, many pregnancies are unintended. Emergency contraception (EC) is the use of drug or device after unprotected intercourse to prevent an unwanted pregnancy. It is a woman's last chance to prevent unintended pregnancy. Nevertheless the confusion about mechanisms of action, side effects, clinical efficacy and controindications makes the intervention underused in every setting investigated. So far levonorgestrel (LNG) has been considered the gold standard for oral EC. Today, a new type of second generation progesterone receptor modulator, ulipristal acetate (UPA) has been proposed as a more effective drug than LNG in prevention of unwanted pregnancies by delaying or inhibiting ovulation; even if many other devices are disposable in commerce. We revised the literature to concern most of the data available on the role of EC and moreover clarifying the available methods, the action windows of the accessible devices, the adverse events and the controindications.

Ulipristal acetate for emergency contraception.

OBJECTIVE: To review the pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, efficacy, and safety of data of ulipristal acetate, a new emergency contraceptive approved for use up to 120 hours after unprotected intercourse. DATA SOURCES: Articles pertaining to the topic were identified and reviewed through searches of PubMed (1994-March 2011) and clinicaltrials.gov, using the key terms ulipristal and CDB-2914. Ella approval documents were obtained and reviewed from Drugs@FDA on the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Web site. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: All published data and FDA approval documents examining pharmacologic, pharmacokinetic, and clinical studies related to ulipristal acetate as an emergency contraceptive were evaluated. Selected studies included 3 randomized trials and 1 meta-analysis. DATA SYNTHESIS: Ulipristal acetate is a progesterone agonist/antagonist emergency contraceptive approved for the prevention of pregnancy to be taken as soon as possible, within 120 hours after unprotected intercourse or a known or suspected contraceptive failure. Based upon results of the Phase 3 clinical trials used to obtain approval, ulipristal acetate administration was at least as effective as levonorgestrel in the reduction of pregnancy rate when studied alone after unprotected intercourse and when taken up to 120 hours after unprotected intercourse. Commonly reported adverse effects associated with ulipristal acetate in trials included headache, breast tenderness, nausea, and abdominal pain. CONCLUSIONS: Ulipristal acetate is effective as an emergency contraceptive for up to 120 hours after unprotected intercourse. Because ulipristal is available only via prescription, it may be covered by insurance. However, the additional factors of travel expenses and time to make and attend a physician appointment must be taken into account when considering use of ulipristal as an emergency contraceptive. Due to the similarity of its structure to mifepristone, controversy regarding ulipristal's mechanism of action has arisen.

"I love my ECPs": challenges to bridging emergency contraceptive users to more effective contraceptive methods in Ghana.

BACKGROUND AND METHODS: Emergency contraceptive pills (ECPs) are becoming more popular, yet little is known about the contraceptive preferences of women who take ECPs. Women purchasing ECPs were recruited from pharmacies in Accra, Ghana. A total of 24 semi-structured, qualitative interviews were conducted in May 2008. RESULTS: Nearly all participants preferred ECPs to other contraceptive methods. Although fear of side effects from oral contraceptive pills (OCPs), intrauterine devices and injectables were deterrents to use of those methods, side effects from ECPs were acceptable to this small and highly self-selected group of ECP users. Participants had little knowledge about how other contraceptive methods work and expressed a strong distrust and dislike of condoms. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Study participants loved their ECPs, despite minor discomforts like bleeding, and most had no concerns about repeated use, though these findings may not apply to women outside Accra or women who obtain ECPs from non-pharmacy settings. Future interventions should work to dispel myths about OCPs, condoms and other modern methods, and focus on basic contraception education.

Knowledge and practices of emergency contraception among Ghanaian women.

The use of emergency contraceptives (EC) to prevent unwanted pregnancies when effective contraception has not been used is universally acknowledged. A study looked at the knowledge and practices of emergency contraception in 476 women in the reproductive age in Ghana. Knowledge and usage of EC applied to 57% and 41% of participants, respectively. Knowledge was independent of age (p = 0.26), marital status (p = 0.14) and level of education (p = 0.21). Drugs (85.6%), herbal preparations (14.4%) and douching (43%) were used for emergency contraception. Drugs used included the combined Pill-24.0%, Postinor-28.5% and Norethisterone-43%. Only 44% correctly used drugs as EC. There is a high level of knowledge about EC as well as usage in the country. There is general misuse ofnorethisterone as EC. There is no knowledge in this study population that intrauterine device can be used as EC.

Drug interactions between emergency contraceptive drugs and cytochrome inducers: literature review and quantitative prediction.

The emergency contraceptive drugs (EC), levonorgestrel (LNG) and ulipristal acetate (UPA), are sensitive substrates of cytochrome P450 3A4 (CYP3A4). In 2016, the label of LNG was updated based on a drug-drug interaction (DDI) study showing a significant decrease in LNG exposure when co-administered with efavirenz, a known CYP3A4 inducer. DDI between UPA and CYP3A4 inducers are poorly characterized. The aims of this study were to review quantitative data from the literature on DDI with EC, to provide quantitative predictions of DDI between UPA and CYP3A4 inducers, and to identify moderate and severe DDI that may require a dose adjustment. A literature search was performed on pharmacokinetic DDI of LNG and UPA. Quantitative prediction of DDI with UPA was carried out by using the in vivo mechanistic static model (IMSM). Limited information was available on DDI with emergency contraception drugs. For LNG, data from eleven studies were retrieved, including five known CYP3A4 inducers that confirmed a risk of underexposure to LNG when co-administered with inducers. For UPA, only three studies were identified, including only one CYP3A4 inducer. The IMSM approach indicated that UPA is a sensitive substrate of CYP3A4, with an estimated contribution of 86% of CYP3A4 to oral clearance. Moderate to severe DDI were predicted in 17 cases with CYP3A4 inducers, and dosage adjustments were suggested. This study illustrates the ability of the IMSM approach to inform about the DDI profile of old and new drugs.

Repeated use of pre- and postcoital hormonal contraception for prevention of pregnancy.

BACKGROUND: Repeated use of postcoital hormonal contraception is not currently recommended due to the higher risk of side effects and lower contraceptive effectiveness compared to other modern methods of contraception. However, emerging evidence indicates renewed interest in a regular coitally-dependent method of oral contraception. We re-evaluated the existing data on safety and effectiveness of pericoital use of levonorgestrel and other hormonal drugs to prevent pregnancy. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness and safety of repeated use of pre- and postcoital hormonal contraception for pregnancy prevention SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the computerized databases MEDLINE, POPLINE, CINAHL, LILACS, EMBASE and CENTRAL for trials that tested repeated pre- and postcoital use of hormonal drugs for pregnancy prevention. We also searched for current trials via ClinicalTrials.gov and ICTRP. SELECTION CRITERIA: Published and unpublished studies in any language of repeated postcoital or immediately precoital use of hormonal drugs for contraception with pregnancy as an outcome DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently confirmed the eligibility and extracted data from the included studies. We calculated confidence intervals (CI) around individual study Pearl indices using a Poisson distribution. We presented individual study estimates and pooled estimates and their 95% CI, where appropriate. MAIN RESULTS: We found 21 trials that evaluated pericoital use of LNG and other hormonal drugs on a regular basis to prevent pregnancy. Pericoital levonorgestrel (LNG) was reasonably efficacious and safe. The pooled Pearl Index for the 0.75 mg dose of LNG was 5.1 per 100 woman-years (WY) (95% CI 3.8 to 6.7). The pooled Pearl Index for all doses of LNG was 4.9 per 100 WY (95% CI 4.3 to 5.5). Other hormonal drugs appeared promising but most of them were not studied extensively. Most women liked the pericoital method in spite of frequent menstrual irregularities. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The studies of pericoital LNG regimens provided promising results but had a number of serious methodological limitations. A pressing need exits to conduct a rigorous research to confirm the efficacy and safety of pericoital use of LNG as a primary means of contraception among women with infrequent intercourse. If the method is shown to be efficacious, safe and acceptable, the results may warrant revision of the current WHO recommendations and marketing strategies.

Ulipristal - a new emergency contraceptive pill.

Until recently, women in the UK who wanted emergency contraception had two options: an oral hormonal method (levonorgestrel), which is licensed for use up to 3 days after unprotected sexual intercourse; or a copper-bearing intrauterine device (IUD), which can be inserted up to 5 days after unprotected intercourse or up to 5 days after the earliest likely calculated ovulation. Now ulipristal acetate (ellaOne - HRA Pharma), a new oral hormonal emergency contraceptive, has been licensed in the European Union for use within 120 hours (5 days) of unprotected intercourse. Here we assess whether it is an advance for emergency contraception.

Knowledge and attitudes of pharmacists regarding over-the-counter emergency contraception in South-Eastern Hungary.

OBJECTIVES: In Hungary, the one-dose levonorgestrel-only emergency contraception pill (ECP) is available only with prescription. There is a perceived need among both doctors and women to introduce ECP over-the-counter (OTC). The aim of this study was to gain information--which, as in most geographical areas, was lacking so far--on the knowledge and attitude of pharmacists relating to OTC use of ECP in South-Eastern Hungary. METHODS: A questionnaire survey with 22 questions was conducted among the members of the Chamber of Pharmacists in the three-county area. RESULTS: Completed questionnaires were returned by 108 pharmacists. The vast majority (97%) of the respondents were aware of the dosing schedule of the available ECP. Nearly three quarters (73.4%) of the pharmacists estimated the effectiveness of ECP to be 80%. However, the knowledge around side effects, mode of action and effect on the menstrual cycle varied. Fifty-five per cent of the pharmacists would prefer OTC distribution of ECP. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study in Hungary about knowledge and awareness of pharmacists regarding ECP. Most respondents were reasonably informed but further training courses for pharmacists are recommended before introducing OTC access to ECP in Hungary.

A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Adverse Effects of Levonorgestrel Emergency Oral Contraceptive.

INTRODUCTION: The levonorgestrel oral emergency contraceptive is well tolerated and effective, however its use is still limited, mainly due to safety concerns. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to summarize current evidence regarding the adverse events, and their prevalence, reported during the use of oral levonorgestrel emergency contraceptives. METHODS: Four electronic databases and the US FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) Public Dashboard were searched. Studies that reported or investigated safety outcomes or adverse reactions during the use of levonorgestrel as an emergency oral contraceptive were included. Data on study design, demographics of levonorgestrel and the control cohort, and reported adverse effects were extracted. RESULTS: A total of 47 articles were included in this systematic review, from which it was shown that most of the adverse reactions were common and not serious. Uncommon adverse reactions identified included anorexia, ectopic pregnancy, exanthema, chloasma, miscarriage, and weight gain. Multiple serious adverse events, including convulsion, ectopic pregnancy, febrile neutropenia, stroke, abdominal hernia, anaphylaxis, cancer, ovarian cyst rupture, serious infections, and suicidal ideation, were reported. In addition, the prevalence of adverse events after a levonorgestrel 0.75 mg two-dose regimen and a levonorgestrel 1.5 mg single-dose regimen were not statistically different (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The most common adverse effects of levonorgestrel were not serious. This systematic review shows that data regarding the adverse reactions of repeated use of levonorgestrel are scarce. Studies on the multiple uses of levonorgestrel emergency contraception are still required to ensure its safety.

Pregnancy outcome after levonorgestrel-only emergency contraception failure: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Levonorgestrel (LNG), as a dedicated emergency contraception (EC) product, has been available over-the-counter in China for 10 years. Until now, only a small number of deliveries after LNG-EC failure have been documented. METHODS: This study was a prospective comparative cohort study. A group of 332 pregnant women who had used LNG-EC during the conception cycle was recruited, and matched to a group of 332 pregnant women without the exposure to LNG. Congenital malformations, perinatal complications and delivery circumstances were investigated in this study. RESULTS: There were 31 pregnant women in the study group and 28 in the comparison group miscarried within 14 weeks of gestation. In the study and comparison groups, four malformations were found in each group. In the study group, both birthweight (3416 versus 3345 g, P = 0.040) and the sex ratio of birth (boys/girls, 1.14 versus 0.90, P = 0.153) were higher than in the comparison group. There were no statistically significant differences in the incidence of miscarriage or malformation or in the neonatal outcome between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: There was no association between the use of LNG-EC pills and the risk of major congenital malformations, pregnancy complications or any other adverse pregnancy outcomes in our study.

Adolescent access to emergency contraception: a comment on the UK context.

The provision of emergency contraception (EC) in the United Kingdom (UK) has been transformed over the past decade through advances in pharmacology and the implementation of governmental measures to reduce teenage pregnancy rates. This paper considers how these issues have developed in the current social and political context with specific reference to adolescent access to EC in the UK. It highlights the concerns caused by increased availability of EC and the tension between adolescent rights to confidential treatment and advice, and professional anxiety about encouraging secrecy or parental deception. It concludes that adolescents, whilst benefiting from increased access to EC may also face a series of challenges as a result.