Dutch
Albanian
Arabic
Armenian
Azerbaijani
Belarusian
Bengali
Bosnian
Catalan
Czech
Danish
Deutsch
Dutch
English
Estonian
Finnish
Français
Greek
Haitian Creole
Hebrew
Hindi
Hungarian
Icelandic
Indonesian
Irish
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Latvian
Lithuanian
Macedonian
Mongolian
Norwegian
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Romanian
Russian
Serbian
Slovak
Slovenian
Spanish
Swahili
Swedish
Turkish
Ukrainian
Vietnamese
Български
中文(简体)
中文(繁體)
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2010-Mar

Skin patch and vaginal ring versus combined oral contraceptives for contraception.

Alleen geregistreerde gebruikers kunnen artikelen vertalen
Log in Schrijf in
De link wordt op het klembord opgeslagen
Laureen M Lopez
David A Grimes
Maria F Gallo
Kenneth F Schulz

Sleutelwoorden

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The delivery of combination contraceptive steroids from a skin patch or vaginal ring offers potential advantages over the traditional oral route. The skin patch and vaginal ring could require a lower dose due to increased bioavailability and improved user compliance.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the contraceptive effectiveness, cycle control, adherence (compliance), and safety of the skin patch or the vaginal ring versus combination oral contraceptives (COCs).

METHODS

For trials of the contraceptive patch or the vaginal ring, we searched MEDLINE, POPLINE, CENTRAL, EMBASE, LILACS, ClinicalTrials.gov, and ICTRP. We contacted manufacturers and researchers to identify other trials.

METHODS

All randomized controlled trials comparing the skin patch or vaginal ring with a COC.

METHODS

Data were abstracted by two authors and entered into RevMan. For dichotomous variables, the Peto odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) was calculated. For continuous variables, the mean difference was computed.

RESULTS

We found 5 trials of the skin patch and 10 of the vaginal ring. Contraceptive effectiveness was similar for the patch or ring versus the comparison COC. More patch users discontinued early than COC users: ORs were 1.59 (95% CI 1.26 to 2.00), 1.56 (95% CI 1.18 to 2.06), and 2.57 (95% CI 0.99 to 6.64). Patch users also had more discontinuation due to adverse events. Compared to COC users, patch users reported more breast discomfort, dysmenorrhea, nausea, and vomiting. Patch users reported more compliant cycles than the COC users in two trials: ORs were 2.05 (95% CI 1.83 to 2.29) and 2.76 (95% CI 2.35 to 3.24). The ring trials generally showed similar discontinuation for ring and COC users. Ring users reported less nausea, acne, irritability, and depression than COC users. Ring users had more vaginitis and leukorrhea but less vaginal dryness. Ring users had similar adherence to COC users in two trials but less adherence in one. Cycle control was generally similar for the patch and COC, and was similar or better for the ring versus COC.

CONCLUSIONS

Effectiveness was similar for the methods compared. The patch could lead to more discontinuation while the vaginal ring showed little difference. The patch group had better compliance than the COC group but more side effects. Ring users generally had fewer adverse events than COC users but more vaginal irritation and discharge. High losses to follow up can affect the validity of the results.

Word lid van onze
facebookpagina

De meest complete database met geneeskrachtige kruiden, ondersteund door de wetenschap

  • Werkt in 55 talen
  • Kruidengeneesmiddelen gesteund door de wetenschap
  • Kruidenherkenning door beeld
  • Interactieve GPS-kaart - tag kruiden op locatie (binnenkort beschikbaar)
  • Lees wetenschappelijke publicaties met betrekking tot uw zoekopdracht
  • Zoek medicinale kruiden op hun effecten
  • Organiseer uw interesses en blijf op de hoogte van nieuwsonderzoek, klinische onderzoeken en patenten

Typ een symptoom of een ziekte en lees over kruiden die kunnen helpen, typ een kruid en zie ziekten en symptomen waartegen het wordt gebruikt.
* Alle informatie is gebaseerd op gepubliceerd wetenschappelijk onderzoek

Google Play badgeApp Store badge