Contraception · 2012
A multicenter randomized clinical trial of one-rod etonogestrel and two-rod levonorgestrel contraceptive implants with nonrandomized copper-IUD controls: methodology and insertion data.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Meirik Olav, Brache Vivian, Orawan Kiriwat, Habib Ndema Abu, Schmidt Johannes, Ortayli Nuriye, Culwell Kelly, Jackson Emily, Ali Moazzam, WHO Study Group on Contraceptive Implants for Women
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Comparative data on etonogestrel and two-rod levonorgestrel contraceptive implants are lacking.
STUDY DESIGN: A multicenter, open, parallel-group trial with random allocation of implants was performed. For every second implant user, an age-matched woman choosing an intrauterine device (IUD) (TCu380A) was admitted. Methods and data on implant/IUD insertion and 6-week follow-up are reported.
RESULTS: A total of 2008 women were randomized to an implant, and 974 women were enrolled in the IUD group. Results from 997 etonogestrel implant users, 997 levonorgestrel implant users and 971 IUD users were analyzed. In the etonogestrel and levonorgestrel groups, respectively, mean insertion durations were 51 (SD 50.2) s and 88 (SD 60.8) s; complication rates at insertion were 0.8% and 0.2%; and at follow-up, 27.2% and 26.7% of women, respectively, had signs or symptoms at the insertion site. At follow-up within 6 weeks after insertion, all implants were in situ, while 2.1% of IUDs were expelled.
CONCLUSION: Performance of etonogestrel and levonorgestrel implants at insertion and within the first 6 weeks is similar. Short-term (6 weeks) continuation rates appear higher for implants than TCu380A.
STUDY DESIGN: A multicenter, open, parallel-group trial with random allocation of implants was performed. For every second implant user, an age-matched woman choosing an intrauterine device (IUD) (TCu380A) was admitted. Methods and data on implant/IUD insertion and 6-week follow-up are reported.
RESULTS: A total of 2008 women were randomized to an implant, and 974 women were enrolled in the IUD group. Results from 997 etonogestrel implant users, 997 levonorgestrel implant users and 971 IUD users were analyzed. In the etonogestrel and levonorgestrel groups, respectively, mean insertion durations were 51 (SD 50.2) s and 88 (SD 60.8) s; complication rates at insertion were 0.8% and 0.2%; and at follow-up, 27.2% and 26.7% of women, respectively, had signs or symptoms at the insertion site. At follow-up within 6 weeks after insertion, all implants were in situ, while 2.1% of IUDs were expelled.
CONCLUSION: Performance of etonogestrel and levonorgestrel implants at insertion and within the first 6 weeks is similar. Short-term (6 weeks) continuation rates appear higher for implants than TCu380A.