PDF herunterladen
Semin Reprod Med 2010; 28(2): 147-155
DOI: 10.1055/s-0030-1248140
© Thieme Medical Publishers

Contraception for Specific Populations

Anitra Beasley1
  • 1Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Columbia University, New York, New York
Weitere Informationen

Publikationsverlauf

Publikationsdatum:
26. April 2010 (online)

    Lizenzen und Reprints

ABSTRACT

Almost half of the pregnancies in the United States each year are unintended. Although there are multiple contraceptive options available, providers often struggle with meeting the special requirements of adolescent, postpartum, and perimenopausal patients. Adolescents often have trouble adhering to a contraceptive regimen; postmenopausal women face an increasing risk of medical comorbidities. With postpartum women, the risks and benefits of the method must be considered for both the woman and the infant. The contraceptive needs of these populations are specifically addressed in this article.

KEYWORDS

Contraception - adolescents - postpartum - perimenopause

REFERENCES

  • 1 Finer L B, Henshaw S K. Disparities in rates of unintended pregnancy in the United States, 1994 and 2001.  Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2006;  38(2) 90-96
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Medical eligibility criteria for contraceptive use. 3rd ed. Geneva, Switzerland; World Health Organization; 2004 Available at: http://www.who.int/reproductive-health/publications/mec/mec.pdf Accessed August 26, 2009
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Guttmacher Institute .Facts on American teens' sexual and reproductive health. June 1, 2009. Available at: https://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_ATSRH.pdf Accessed June 1, 2009
    Google Scholar
  • 4 Blythe M J, Diaz A. American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Adolescence . Contraception and adolescents.  Pediatrics. 2007;  120(5) 1135-1148
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Gupta N, Corrado S, Goldstein M. Hormonal contraception for the adolescent.  Pediatr Rev. 2008;  29(11) 386-396, quiz 397
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Guttmacher Institute .Minors' access to contraceptive services. State Policies in Brief. June 1, 2009. Available at: http://www.guttmacher.org/statecenter/spibs/spib_MACS.pdf Accessed June 1, 2009
    Google Scholar
  • 7 Cates W, Raymond E G. Vaginal barriers and spermicides. In: Hatcher RA, Trussell J, Nelson A, Cates W, Stewart F, Kowal D Contraceptive Technology. 19th ed. New York, NY; Ardent Media 2007: 317-335
    Google Scholar
  • 8 Trussell J. Contraceptive efficacy. In: Hatcher RA, Trussell J, Nelson AL, Willard Cates J, Stewart F, Kowal D Contraceptive Technology. 19th ed. New York, NY; Ardent Media 2007: 747-826
    Google Scholar
  • 9 Kost K, Singh S, Vaughan B, Trussell J, Bankole A. Estimates of contraceptive failure from the 2002 National Survey of Family Growth.  Contraception. 2008;  77(1) 10-21
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Rosenberg M J, Burnhill M S, Waugh M S, Grimes D A, Hillard P JA. Compliance and oral contraceptives: a review.  Contraception. 1995;  52(3) 137-141
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Vaughan B, Trussell J, Kost K, Singh S, Jones R. Discontinuation and resumption of contraceptive use: results from the 2002 National Survey of Family Growth.  Contraception. 2008;  78(4) 271-283
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Ahrendt H J, Nisand I, Bastianelli C et al.. Efficacy, acceptability and tolerability of the combined contraceptive ring, NuvaRing, compared with an oral contraceptive containing 30 microg of ethinyl estradiol and 3 mg of drospirenone.  Contraception. 2006;  74(6) 451-457
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Archer D F, Bigrigg A, Smallwood G H, Shangold G A, Creasy G W, Fisher A C. Assessment of compliance with a weekly contraceptive patch (Ortho Evra™/Evra™) among North American women.  Fertil Steril. 2002;  77 S27-31
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 FDA updates labeling for Ortho Evra contraceptive patch. FDA news release. November 10, 2005. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/2005/ucm108517.htm Accessed September 2, 2009
    Google Scholar
  • 15 FDA approves update to label on birth control patch. FDA news release. June 18, 2008. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/2008/ucm116842.htm Accessed September 2, 2009
    Google Scholar
  • 16 Burkman R T. Transdermal hormonal contraception: benefits and risks.  Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007;  197(2) e1-6
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Zieman M, Guillebaud J, Weisberg E, Shangold G A, Fisher A C, Creasy G W. Contraceptive efficacy and cycle control with the Ortho Evra™/Evra™ transdermal system: the analysis of pooled data.  Fertil Steril. 2002;  77 S13-18
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Berenson A B, Rahman M. Changes in weight, total fat, percent body fat, and central-to-peripheral fat ratio associated with injectable and oral contraceptive use.  Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009;  200(3) e1-8
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Hubacher D, Goco N, Gonzalez B, Taylor D. Factors affecting continuation rates of DMPA.  Contraception. 1999;  60(6) 345-351
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Kaunitz A M, Arias R, McClung M. Bone density recovery after depot medroxyprogesterone acetate injectable contraception use.  Contraception. 2008;  77(2) 67-76
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 United States Food and Drug Administration .Medwatch. November 18, 2004. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/Safety/MedWatch/SafetyInformation/SafetyAlertsforHumanMedicalProducts/ucm154784.htm Accessed October 16, 2009
    Google Scholar
  • 22 Cromer B A, Scholes D, Berenson A, Cundy T, Clark M K, Kaunitz A M. Society for Adolescent Medicine . Depot medroxyprogesterone acetate and bone mineral density in adolescents—the Black Box Warning: a Position Paper of the Society for Adolescent Medicine.  J Adolesc Health. 2006;  39(2) 296-301
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Committee on Gynecologic Practice . Depot medroxyprogesterone acetate and bone effects. ACOG committee opinion no. 415.  Obstet Gynecol. 2008;  112 727-730
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Beerthuizen R, van Beek A, Massai R, Mäkäräinen L, Hout J, Bennink H C. Bone mineral density during long-term use of the progestagen contraceptive implant Implanon compared to a non-hormonal method of contraception.  Hum Reprod. 2000;  15(1) 118-122
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Deans E I, Grimes D A. Intrauterine devices for adolescents: a systematic review.  Contraception. 2009;  79(6) 418-423
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists . ACOG committee opinion no. 392, December 2007. Intrauterine device and adolescents.  Obstet Gynecol. 2007;  110 1493-1495
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Sääv I, Aronsson A, Marions L, Stephansson O, Gemzell-Danielsson K. Cervical priming with sublingual misoprostol prior to insertion of an intrauterine device in nulliparous women: a randomized controlled trial.  Hum Reprod. 2007;  22(10) 2647-2652
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Grimes D A, Hubacher D, Lopez L M, Schulz K F. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for heavy bleeding or pain associated with intrauterine-device use.  Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006;  (4) CD006034
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Allen R H, Bartz D, Grimes D A, Hubacher D, O'Brien P. Interventions for pain with intrauterine device insertion.  Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009;  (3) CD007373
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Stewart F, Trussell J, Van Look P F. Emergency contraception. In: Hatcher RA, Trussell J, Nelson A, Cates W, Stewart F, Kowal D Contraceptive Technology. 19th ed. New York, NY; Ardent Media 2007: 87-116
    Google Scholar
  • 31 Steinbrook R. Waiting for plan B—the FDA and nonprescription use of emergency contraception.  N Engl J Med. 2004;  350(23) 2327-2329
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Harper C C, Cheong M, Rocca C H, Darney P D, Raine T R. The effect of increased access to emergency contraception among young adolescents.  Obstet Gynecol. 2005;  106(3) 483-491
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Speroff L, Mishell Jr D R. The postpartum visit: it's time for a change in order to optimally initiate contraception.  Contraception. 2008;  78(2) 90-98
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Kennedy K I, Trussell J. Postpartum contraception and lactation. In: Hatcher RA, Trussell J, Nelson A, Cates W, Stewart F, Kowal D Contraceptive Technology. 19th ed. New York, NY; Ardent Media 2007: 403-431
    Google Scholar
  • 35 Peterson H B, Xia Z, Hughes J M, Wilcox L S, Tylor L R, Trussell J. The risk of pregnancy after tubal sterilization: findings from the U.S. Collaborative Review of Sterilization.  Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996;  174(4) 1161-1168; discussion 1168–1170
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Bucklin B AM. Postpartum tubal ligation: timing and other anesthetic considerations.  Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2003;  46(3) 657-666
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Heit J A, Kobbervig C E, James A H, Petterson T M, Bailey K R, Melton III L J. Trends in the incidence of venous thromboembolism during pregnancy or postpartum: a 30-year population-based study.  Ann Intern Med. 2005;  143(10) 697-706
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Breastfeeding report card, United States: outcome indicators. July 29, 2009. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/breastfeeding/data/report_card2.htm Accessed August 20, 2009
    Google Scholar
  • 39 Tankeyoon M, Dusitsin N, Chalapati S et al.. Effects of hormonal contraceptives on milk volume and infant growth. WHO Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction Task force on oral contraceptives.  Contraception. 1984;  30(6) 505-522
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 World Health Organization (WHO) Task Force on Oral Contraceptives . Effects of hormonal contraceptives on breast milk composition and infant growth.  Stud Fam Plann. 1988;  19(6 Pt 1) 361-369
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Truitt S T, Fraser A B, Grimes D A, Gallo M F, Schulz K F. Hormonal contraception during lactation. systematic review of randomized controlled trials.  Contraception. 2003;  68(4) 233-238
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 ACOG Committee on Practice Bulletins-Gynecology . ACOG practice bulletin no. 73: Use of hormonal contraception in women with coexisting medical conditions.  Obstet Gynecol. 2006;  107 1453-1472
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Faculty of Family Planning & Reproductive Health Care . FFPRHC Guidance (July 2004): Contraceptive choices for breastfeeding women.  J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care. 2004;  30(3) 181-189; quiz 189
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Jimenez J, Ochoa M, Soler M P, Portales P. Long-term follow-up of children breast-fed by mothers receiving depot-medroxyprogesterone acetate.  Contraception. 1984;  30(6) 523-533
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Moggia A V, Harris G S, Dunson T R et al.. A comparative study of a progestin-only oral contraceptive versus non-hormonal methods in lactating women in Buenos Aires, Argentina.  Contraception. 1991;  44(1) 31-43
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 McCann M F, Moggia A V, Higgins J E, Potts M, Becker C. The effects of a progestin-only oral contraceptive (levonorgestrel 0.03 mg) on breast-feeding.  Contraception. 1989;  40(6) 635-648
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Medical eligibility criteria for contraceptive use: 2008 update: World Health Organization; 2008. Available at: http://www.inspq.qc.ca/aspx/docs/contraceptionhormonale/WHO-mec_update_2008.pdf Accessed August 26, 2009
    Google Scholar
  • 48 O'Hanley K, Huber D H. Postpartum IUDS: keys for success.  Contraception. 1992;  45(4) 351-361
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Kapp N, Curtis K M. Intrauterine device insertion during the postpartum period: a systematic review.  Contraception. 2009;  80(4) 327-336
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Rodrigues da Cunha A C, Dorea J G, Cantuaria A A. Intrauterine device and maternal copper metabolism during lactation.  Contraception. 2001;  63(1) 37-39
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Shaamash A H, Sayed G H, Hussien M M, Shaaban M M. A comparative study of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system Mirena versus the Copper T380A intrauterine device during lactation: breast-feeding performance, infant growth and infant development.  Contraception. 2005;  72(5) 346-351
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Mishell D R. Menopause. In: Stenchever MA, Droegemueller W, Herbst AL, Mishell DR Comprehensive Gynecology. 4th ed. St. Louis, MO; Mosby 2001: 1217-1258
    Google Scholar
  • 53 Jacobsson B, Ladfors L, Milsom I. Advanced maternal age and adverse perinatal outcome.  Obstet Gynecol. 2004;  104(4) 727-733
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 54 Drew O, Sherrard J. Sexually transmitted infections in the older woman.  Menopause Int. 2008;  14(3) 134-135
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 55 Mosher W, Martinez G, Chandra A, Abma J, Wilson S. Use of Contraception and Use of Family Planning Services in the United States: 1982–2002. Advance Data No. 350. Atlanta, GA; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 2004
    Google Scholar
  • 56 Faculty of Family Planning and Reproductive Health Care Clinical Effectiveness Unit . FFPRHC Guidance (January 2005) contraception for women aged over 40 years.  J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care. 2005;  31(1) 51-63, quiz 63–64
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 57 Hannaford P C, Selvaraj S, Elliott A M, Angus V, Iversen L, Lee A J. Cancer risk among users of oral contraceptives: cohort data from the Royal College of General Practitioner's oral contraception study.  BMJ. 2007;  335(7621) 651-659
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Anitra BeasleyM.D. 

Clinical Instructor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Columbia University

622 W. 168th Street, PH 16-69, New York, New York 10032

eMail: adb2139@columbia.edu

      >