Search

Purpose: We examined the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in Fall 2021 on sexual and reproductive health (SRH) services among physicians whose practice provided these services to adolescents just before the pandemic., Methods: Data were from the DocStyles online panel survey administered September-November 2021 to US physicians who reported their practice provided SRH services to adolescent patients before the pandemic (n = 948). We calculated prevalence of service delivery challenges (e.g., limited long-acting reversible contraception services) and use of strategies to support access (e.g., telehealth) in the month prior to survey completion, compared these estimates with prevalence "at any point during the COVID-19 pandemic", and examined differences by physician specialty and adolescent patient volume., Results: Fewer physicians reported their practice experienced service delivery challenges in the month prior to survey completion than at any point during the pandemic. About 10% indicated limited long-acting reversible contraception and sexually transmitted infection testing services in the prior month overall; prevalence varied by physician specialty (e.g., 26% and 17%, respectively by service, among internists). Overall, about 25% of physicians reported reductions in walk-in hours, weekend/evening hours, and adolescents seeking care in the prior month. While most practices that initiated strategies supporting access to services during the pandemic used such strategies in the prior month, some practices (22%-37% depending on the strategy) did not., Discussion: Findings suggest some physicians who serve adolescents continued to experience challenges providing SRH services in the Fall 2021, and some discontinued strategies to support access that had been initiated during the pandemic., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objective(s): To understand how contraception method use differed between women prescribed and not prescribed medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) among commercially-insured and Medicaid-insured women., Study Design: IBM Watson Health MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters database and the Multi-State Medicaid database were used to calculate the (1) crude prevalence, and (2) adjusted odds ratios (adjusted for demographic characteristics) of using long-acting reversible or short-acting hormonal contraception methods or female sterilization compared with none of these methods (no method) in 2018 by MOUD status among women with OUD, aged 20 to 49 years, with continuous health insurance coverage through commercial insurance or Medicaid for ≥6 years. Claims data was used to define contraception use. Fisher exact test or χ 2 test with a P-value ≤ 0.0001, based on the Holm-Bonferroni method, and 95% confidence intervals were used to determine statistically significant differences for prevalence estimates and adjusted odds ratios, respectively., Results: Only 41% of commercially-insured and Medicaid-insured women with OUD were prescribed MOUD. Medicaid-insured women with OUD prescribed MOUD had a significantly lower crude prevalence of using no method (71.1% vs 79.0%) and higher odds of using female sterilization (aOR, 1.33; 95% CI: 1.06-1.67 vs no method) than those not prescribed MOUD. Among commercially-insured women there were no differences in contraceptive use by MOUD status and 66% used no method., Conclusions: Among women with ≥ 6 years of continuous insurance coverage, contraceptive use differed by MOUD status and insurance. Prescribing MOUD for women with OUD can be improved to ensure quality care., Implications: Only two in five women with OUD had evidence of being prescribed MOUD, and majority did not use prescription contraception or female sterilization. Our findings support opportunities to improve prescribing for MOUD and integrate contraception and MOUD services to improve clinical care among women with OUD., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Purpose: Among U.S. primary care physicians who delivered sexual and reproductive health (SRH) services to adolescents before the COVID-19 pandemic, we examine (1) changes in availability of in-person SRH services; (2) changes in accessibility and utilization of SRH services; and (3) use of strategies to support provision of SRH services during the pandemic., Methods: Data were from the DocStyles provider survey administered September-October 2020. Descriptive analyses were restricted to family practitioners, internists, and pediatricians whose main work setting was outpatient and whose practice provided family planning or sexually transmitted infection services to ≥ one patient aged 15-19 years per week just before the COVID-19 pandemic (n = 791)., Results: Among physicians whose practices provided intrauterine device/implant placement/removal or clinic-based sexually transmitted infection testing before the COVID-19 pandemic, 51% and 36% indicated disruption of these services during the pandemic, respectively. Some physicians also reported reductions in walk-in hours (38%), evening/weekend hours (31%), and adolescents seeking care (43%) in the past month. At any point during the pandemic, 61% provided contraception initiation/continuation and 44% provided sexually transmitted infection services via telehealth. Among these physicians, about one-quarter reported confidentiality concerns with telehealth in the past month. There were small increases or no changes in other strategies to support contraceptive care., Conclusions: Findings suggest disruption of certain SRH services and issues with access because of the pandemic among primary care providers who serve adolescents. There are opportunities to enhance implementation of confidential telehealth services and other service delivery strategies that could help promote adolescent SRH in the United States., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objective(s): We estimated the prevalence of requiring specific examinations or tests before providing contraception in a nationwide survey of family planning providers., Study Design: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of public-sector health centers and office-based physicians providing family planning services across the United States in 2019 (n = 1395). We estimated the weighted proportion of providers (or their health center or practice) who required blood pressure measurement, pelvic examination (bimanual examination and cervical inspection), Papanicolaou (Pap) smear, clinical breast examination (CBE), and chlamydia and gonorrhea (CT/GC) screening before initiating hormonal or intrauterine contraception (IUC) for healthy women. We performed multivariable regression to identify factors associated with pelvic examination practices aligned with clinical recommendations; these recommendations classify examinations and tests as recommended or unnecessary before initiation of specific contraceptive methods., Results: The overall response rate was 51%. Most providers required blood pressure measurement before initiating each method. Unnecessary CBE, Pap smears, and CT/GC screening were required by 14% to 33% of providers across methods. Fifty-two to 62% of providers required recommended pelvic examination before IUC placement; however, 16% to 23% of providers required unnecessary pelvic examinations before non-intrauterine hormonal method initiation. Factors associated with recommendation-aligned pelvic examination practices included having a higher proportion of patients using public funding (Medicaid or other assistance) and more recently completing formal clinical training., Conclusions: Almost half (47%) of providers did not require necessary pelvic examination before placing IUC. Conversely, many providers required unnecessary examinations and tests before contraception initiation for patients., Implications: Most providers required the few recommended examinations and tests for safe contraceptive provision. Reduction of unnecessary examinations and tests may reduce barriers to contraceptive access. There are also opportunities to increase use of recommended examinations, as up to 48% of providers did not require recommended pelvic examination before IUC., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To provide updated and more detailed pooled intrauterine device expulsion rates and expulsion risk estimates among women with postpartum intrauterine device placement by timing of insertion, delivery type, and intrauterine device type to inform current intrauterine device insertion practices in the United States., Data Sources: We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov through June 2019., Study Eligibility Criteria: We included all studies, of any study design, that examined postpartum placement of Copper T380A (copper) or levonorgestrel-containing intrauterine devices that reported counts of expulsion., Study Appraisal and Synthesis Methods: We evaluated intrauterine device expulsion among women receiving postpartum intrauterine devices in the "immediate" (within 10 minutes), "early inpatient" (>10 minutes to <72 hours), "early outpatient" (72 hours to <4 weeks), and interval (≥4 weeks) time periods after delivery. We assessed study quality using the US Preventive Services Task Force evidence grading system. We calculated pooled absolute rates of partial and complete intrauterine device expulsion separately and estimated adjusted relative risks by the timing of postpartum placement, delivery type, and intrauterine device type using log-binomial multivariable regression., Results: We identified 48 level I to II-3 studies of poor to good quality that reported a total of 7661 intrauterine device placements. Complete intrauterine device expulsion rates varied by timing of placement as follows: 10.2% (range, 0.0-26.7) for immediate; 13.2% (3.5-46.7) for early inpatient; 0% for early outpatient; and 1.8% (0.0-4.8) for interval placements. Complete intrauterine device expulsion rates also varied by delivery type: 14.8% (range, 4.8-43.1) for vaginal and 3.8% (0.0-21.1) for cesarean deliveries. Among immediate postpartum vaginal placements, the expulsion rate for levonorgetrel intrauterine devices was 27.4% (range, 18.8-45.2) and 12.4% (4.8-43.1) for copper intrauterine devices. Compared with interval placement, immediate and early postpartum placements (inpatient and outpatient combined) were associated with greater risk of complete expulsion (adjusted risk ratio, 8.33; 95% confidence interval, 4.32-16.08, and adjusted risk ratio, 5.27; 95% confidence interval, 2.56-10.85, respectively). Among immediate postpartum placements, risk of expulsion was greater for placement after vaginal compared with cesarean deliveries (adjusted risk ratio, 4.57; 95% confidence interval, 3.49-5.99). Among immediate placements at the time of vaginal delivery, levonorgestrel intrauterine devices were associated with a greater risk of expulsion compared with copper intrauterine devices (adjusted risk ratio, 1.90; 95% confidence interval, 1.36-2.65)., Conclusion: Although intrauterine device expulsion rates vary by timing of placement, type, and mode of delivery, intrauterine device insertion can take place at any time. Understanding the risk of intrauterine device expulsion at each time period will enable women to make an informed choice about when to initiate use of an intrauterine device in the postpartum period based on their own goals and preferences., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: The Zika Contraception Access Network (Z-CAN) provided women in Puerto Rico access to contraceptive counseling and the full range of reversible contraceptive methods, on the same day and at no cost, during the Zika virus outbreak. Because trained physicians and clinic staff were crucial to the program, we aimed to assess the implementation of and satisfaction with Z-CAN from their perspectives., Study Design: Physicians and clinic staff in the Z-CAN program participated in an online survey on program implementation (e.g., on-site and same-day contraceptive provision), program satisfaction, and knowledge consistent with program training (e.g., contraceptive initiation and safety, client-centered contraceptive counseling, intrauterine device [IUD] and implant insertion and removal)., Results: Survey respondents included 63 physicians and 53 clinic staff members. A high proportion of physicians (>93%) reported providing IUDs, implants, pills, rings, condoms, and injections and most were very often or always able to provide same-day access to most methods. Over 90% of physicians were satisfied with the Z-CAN program, training, and ongoing support. Staff satisfaction with these program elements was similar but slightly lower. Knowledge about exams and tests needed for initiation and safety of methods varied but was generally consistent with guidelines on which physicians received training. Most physicians (>90%) reported confidence in skills on which they received training as part of the program., Conclusions: From the perspectives of participating physicians and clinic staff, the program was generally implemented as intended and providers were largely satisfied with program strategies including training and on-going support., Implications: Certain key components of the Z-CAN program, such as training, proctoring, and involvement of clinic staff were likely critical to Z-CAN's implementation and provider satisfaction. Results from this provider survey can inform implementation of similar efforts to increase access to contraception in both emergency and non-emergency settings., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objective: To systematically review the literature to determine if extended use of intrauterine devices, including the copper or levonorgestrel intrauterine device, beyond approved durations is effective and safe for preventing pregnancy., Study Design: We searched PubMed, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Global Index Medicus from inception through June 2019. We considered primary studies of women using the T380A copper or currently available levonorgestrel intrauterine devices past their approved duration (extended use). The primary outcome was pregnancy. Safety outcomes included adverse events and side effects that led to discontinuation. We abstracted study data into evidence tables and assessed study quality as related to the risk of bias, precision, and external validity. For each intrauterine device type, we calculated a pooled pregnancy rate during the first 2 years of extended use using the Poisson inverse variance method., Results: Of 4068 studies identified by our search, 4 good-to-poor-quality studies of the 52 mg levonorgestrel intrauterine device (approved for 5 years), with a total of 2098 women starting extended use, and 2 good-to-fair-quality studies of the T380A copper intrauterine device (approved for 10 years), with 245 women starting extended use, met inclusion criteria. For the levonorgestrel intrauterine device, the pooled pregnancy rate was 0.02 per 100 person-years (95% confidence interval, 0.00-0.45) in year 6, 0.03 per 100 person-years (95% confidence interval, 0.00-0.71) in year 7, and 0.02 per 100 person-years (95% confidence interval, 0.00-0.29) in years 6 and 7 combined. During this same time, annual rates of adverse events or discontinuation owing to side effects ranged from 0 to 3.7 per 100 participants. For the copper intrauterine device, the pooled pregnancy rate for years 11 and 12 was 0.0 per 100 person-years (95% confidence interval, 0.0-0.8), and annual rates of adverse events and discontinuation owing to side effects during extended use ranged from 0 to 4.6 per 100 participants., Conclusion: The available evidence suggests that rates of pregnancy, adverse events, and discontinuation owing to side effects during the first 2 years of extended use of the 52 mg levonorgestrel intrauterine device and the T380A copper intrauterine device are low and comparable to rates during approved duration of use. Data were limited in quantity and quality, and may not be generalizable to all intrauterine device users., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To systematically review the literature around the safety and effectiveness of hormonal contraception for women who use opioids. Our specific research questions are: 1) Among women who use opioids, do those who use hormonal contraception have increased adverse health events compared with those who do not use hormonal contraception? 2) Are there drug interactions between hormonal contraception and opioids that cause decreased effectiveness or increased toxicity from either drug?, Methods: We searched Medline, Embase, PsychInfo, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, and clinicaltrials.gov through August 2018. We considered randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, and case-control studies, as well as pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic studies. We planned to use standard frameworks to assess risk of bias of included studies., Results: The search identified 1852 articles. The full text of 66 articles was reviewed, and none met inclusion criteria., Conclusions: Because we found no direct evidence on the safety and effectiveness of hormonal contraception for women who use opioids, we considered theoretical concerns. While women with OUD have a high prevalence of co-morbidities, such as viral hepatitis, generally women with medical conditions can safely use most contraceptive methods. When considering the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of hormonal contraception and opioids, there is little theoretical concern for interactions. Therefore, future research efforts could focus on improving access to the full range of contraceptive methods for women who use opioids, reducing unnecessary barriers to initiating and using contraception, while ensuring voluntary choice related to contraceptive use., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: The US Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use (USMEC) is the first national guidance containing evidence-based recommendations for contraception. We describe provider attitudes about contraceptive safety before and after the 2010 USMEC release., Study Design: We conducted two cross-sectional mailed surveys using different nationwide samples of office-based physicians and Title X clinic providers before (2009-2010) and after (2013-2014) the USMEC release. We compared the proportion of providers reporting select contraceptive methods as safe for women with specific characteristics or medical conditions before and after the USMEC release and conducted multivariable logistic regression to adjust for provider characteristics., Results: For the following select characteristics for which the USMEC classifies specific contraceptive methods as safe (Category 1 or 2), a significantly (p<.05) higher proportion of providers reported the method safe after versus before the USMEC release: intrauterine devices (IUDs) for adolescents (79.8% versus 60.2%), IUDs for women with HIV (72.4% versus 50.6%), depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA) for women with obesity (89.5% versus 76.1%), and DMPA for women with history of bariatric surgery (87.6% versus 73.9%). These differences remained significant after adjustment for provider characteristics., Conclusions: While we observed many positive changes in health care provider attitudes related to contraception safety after the USMEC release, gaps remain. Continuing education and evidence-based training for providers, and ensuring office and health center protocols address medical eligibility for contraception for the full range of characteristics included in the USMEC might bridge remaining gaps and increase delivery of high-quality contraception care., Implications: Gaps between evidence and provider attitudes remain that can inform future efforts to improve contraceptive service delivery., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Clinical practice guidelines that recommend women avoid pregnancy immediately after bariatric surgery, highlighting the need for effective contraception. However, women with a history of malabsorptive bariatric procedures should generally not use oral contraceptives, as these procedures may decrease oral contraceptive effectiveness., Objectives: To identify provider characteristics associated with knowledge of combined oral contraceptive (COC) effectiveness., Setting: United States., Methods: We analyzed weighted survey data collected from national samples of public-sector health centers and office-based physicians who regularly provide family planning services (N = 2060). We asked providers about the effectiveness of COCs for women with a history of malabsorptive procedures compared with healthy women, giving them the response options of more/equally effective, less effective, and do not know. We used multinomial logistic regression to calculate adjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals to identify characteristics associated with knowledge of COC effectiveness., Results: Approximately 55% of providers correctly answered that COCs are less effective for women with malabsorptive procedures; 25% considered COCs more/equally effective, and 20% were uncertain. Among public-sector providers, the adjusted odds of uncertainty were significantly higher for those whose clinical focus was not reproductive health, for nurses versus advanced practice clinicians, and for providers working in clinics without Title X funding. For office-based physicians, adolescent medicine providers had higher odds of uncertainty versus obstetrician-gynecologists. Physicians practicing in settings classified as "other" (such as community health centers) had higher odds of considering COCs effective compared with those practicing in hospital or university clinics., Conclusions: Substantial proportions of surveyed providers had inadequate knowledge of COC effectiveness for women with a history of malabsorptive procedures., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Contraception use among postpartum women is important to prevent unintended pregnancies and optimize birth spacing. Long-acting reversible contraception, including intrauterine devices and implants, is highly effective, yet compared to less effective methods utilization rates are low., Objectives: We sought to estimate prevalence of long-acting reversible contraception use among postpartum women and examine factors associated with long-acting reversible contraception use among those using any reversible contraception., Study Design: We analyzed 2012-2015 data from the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System, a population-based survey among women with recent live births. We included data from 37 sites that achieved the minimum overall response rate threshold for data release. We estimated the prevalence of long-acting reversible contraception use in our sample (n = 143,335). We examined maternal factors associated with long-acting reversible contraception use among women using reversible contraception (n = 97,013) using multivariable logistic regression (long-acting reversible contraception vs other type of reversible contraception) and multinomial regression (long-acting reversible contraception vs other hormonal contraception and long-acting reversible contraception vs other nonhormonal contraception)., Results: The prevalence of long-acting reversible contraception use overall was 15.3%. Among postpartum women using reversible contraception, 22.5% reported long-acting reversible contraception use, which varied by site, ranging from 11.2% in New Jersey to 37.6% in Alaska. Factors associated with postpartum long-acting reversible contraception use vs use of another reversible contraceptive method included age ≤24 years (adjusted odds ratio = 1.43; 95% confidence interval = 1.33-1.54) and ≥35 years (adjusted odds ratio = 0.87; 95% confidence interval = 0.80-0.96) vs 25-34 years; public insurance (adjusted odds ratio = 1.15; 95% confidence interval = 1.08-1.24) and no insurance (adjusted odds ratio = 0.73; 95% confidence interval = 0.55-0.96) vs private insurance at delivery; having a recent unintended pregnancy (adjusted odds ratio = 1.44; 95% confidence interval = 1.34-1.54) or being unsure about the recent pregnancy (adjusted odds ratio = 1.29; 95% confidence interval = 1.18-1.40) vs recent pregnancy intended; having ≥1 previous live birth (adjusted odds ratio = 1.40; 95% confidence interval = 1.31-1.48); and having a postpartum check-up after recent live birth (adjusted odds ratio = 2.70; 95% confidence interval = 2.35-3.11). Hispanic and non-Hispanic black postpartum women had a higher rate of long-acting reversible contraception use (26.6% and 23.4%, respectively) compared to non-Hispanic white women (21.5%), and there was significant race/ethnicity interaction with educational level., Conclusion: Nearly 1 in 6 (15.3%) postpartum women with a recent live birth and nearly 1 in 4 (22.5%) postpartum women using reversible contraception reported long-acting reversible contraception use. Our analysis suggests that factors such as age, race/ethnicity, education, insurance, parity, intendedness of recent pregnancy, and postpartum visit attendance may be associated with postpartum long-acting reversible contraception use. Ensuring all postpartum women have access to the full range of contraceptive methods, including long-acting reversible contraception, is important to prevent unintended pregnancy and optimize birth spacing. Contraceptive access may be improved by public health efforts and programs that address barriers in the postpartum period, including increasing awareness of the availability, effectiveness, and safety of long-acting reversible contraception (and other methods), as well as providing full reimbursement for contraceptive services and removal of administrative and logistical barriers., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Purpose: Adolescents may encounter many barriers to initiating contraception. 'Quick Start' is a recommended approach for initiating contraception on the same day as a provider visit. We examined factors associated with health care provider attitudes and practices related to 'Quick Start' provision of combined hormonal contraception (CHC) and depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA) to adolescents., Methods: We analyzed weighted survey data from providers in publicly funded health centers and from office-based physicians (n = 2,056). Using multivariable logistic regression, we estimated adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of the associations between provider characteristics and frequent (very often or often vs. not often or never) 'Quick Start' provision of CHC and DMPA to adolescents in the past year., Results: The prevalence of considering 'Quick Start' as safe was high for CHC (public-sector providers [87.5%]; office-based physicians [80.2%]) and DMPA (public-sector providers [80.9%]; office-based physicians [78.8%]). However, the prevalence of frequent 'Quick Start' provision was lower, particularly among office-based physicians (CHC: public-sector providers [74.2%]; office-based physicians [45.2%]; DMPA: public-sector providers [71.4%]; office-based physicians [46.9%]). Providers who considered 'Quick Start' unsafe or were uncertain about its safety had lower odds of frequent 'Quick Start' provision compared with those who considered it safe (public-sector providers: CHC aOR = 0.09 95% CI 0.06-0.13, DMPA aOR = 0.07 95% CI 0.05-0.10; office-based physicians: CHC aOR = 0.06 95% CI 0.02-0.22, DMPA aOR = 0.07 95% CI 0.02-0.20)., Conclusions: While most providers reported that 'Quick Start' initiation of CHC and DMPA among adolescents is safe, fewer providers reported frequent 'Quick Start' provision in this population, particularly among office-based physicians., (Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objective: The purpose of this study was to determine whether interactions between non-rifamycin antibiotics and hormonal contraceptives result in decreased effectiveness or increased toxicity of either therapy., Study Design: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, clinicaltrials.gov, and Cochrane libraries from database inception through June 2016. We included trials, cohort, case-control, and pharmacokinetic studies in any language that addressed pregnancy rates, pharmacodynamics, or pharmacokinetic outcomes when any hormonal contraceptive and non-rifamycin antibiotic were administered together vs apart. Of 7291 original records that were identified, 29 met criteria for inclusion., Study Appraisal and Synthesis Methods: Two authors independently assessed study quality and risk of bias using the United States Preventive Services Task Force evidence grading system. Findings were tabulated by drug class., Results: Study quality ranged from good to poor and addressed only oral contraceptive pills, emergency contraception pills, and the combined vaginal ring. Two studies demonstrated no difference in pregnancy rates in women who used oral contraceptives with and without non-rifamycin antibiotics. No differences in ovulation suppression or breakthrough bleeding were observed in any study that combined hormonal contraceptives with any antibiotic. No significant decreases in any progestin pharmacokinetic parameter occurred during co-administration with any antibiotic. Ethinyl estradiol area under the curve decreased when administered with dirithromycin, but no other drug., Conclusion: Evidence from clinical and pharmacokinetic outcomes studies does not support the existence of drug interactions between hormonal contraception and non-rifamycin antibiotics. Data are limited by low quantity and quality for some drug classes. Most women can expect no reduction in hormonal contraceptive effect with the concurrent use of non-rifamycin antibiotics., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Migraine with aura and combined hormonal contraceptives are independently associated with an increased risk of ischemic stroke. However, little is known about whether there are any joint effects of migraine and hormonal contraceptives on risk of stroke., Objective: We sought to estimate the incidence of stroke in women of reproductive age and examine the association among combined hormonal contraceptive use, migraine type (with or without aura), and ischemic stroke., Study Design: This study used a nationwide health care claims database and employed a nested case-control study design. Females ages 15-49 years with first-ever stroke during 2006 through 2012 were identified using the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification inpatient services diagnosis codes. Four controls were matched to each case based on age. Migraine headache with and without aura was identified using inpatient or outpatient diagnosis codes. Current combined hormonal contraceptive use was identified using the National Drug Code from the pharmacy database. Conditional logistic regression was used to estimate adjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals of ischemic stroke by migraine type and combined hormonal contraceptive use., Results: From 2006 through 2012, there were 25,887 ischemic strokes among females ages 15-49 years, for a cumulative incidence of 11 strokes/100,000 females. Compared to those with neither migraine nor combined hormonal contraceptive use, the odds ratio of ischemic stroke was highest among those with migraine with aura using combined hormonal contraceptives (odds ratio, 6.1; 95% confidence interval, 3.1-12.1); odds ratios were also elevated for migraine with aura without combined hormonal contraceptive use (odds ratio, 2.7; 95% confidence interval, 1.9-3.7), migraine without aura and combined hormonal contraceptive use (odds ratio, 1.8; 95% confidence interval, 1.1-2.9), and migraine without aura without combined hormonal contraceptive use (odds ratio, 2.2; 95% confidence interval, 1.9-2.7)., Conclusion: The joint effect of combined hormonal contraceptives and migraine with aura was associated with a 6-fold increased risk of ischemic stroke compared with neither risk factor. Use of combined hormonal contraceptives did not substantially further increase risk of ischemic stroke among women with migraine without aura. Determining migraine type is critical in assessing safety of combined hormonal contraceptives among women with migraine., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Combined hormonal contraceptives (CHCs), containing estrogen and progestin, are associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and arterial thromboembolism (ATE) compared with nonuse. Few studies have examined whether nonoral formulations (including the combined hormonal patch, combined vaginal ring and combined injectable contraceptives) increase the risk of thrombosis compared with combined oral contraceptives (COCs)., Objectives: The objectives were to examine the risk of VTE and ATE among women using nonoral CHCs compared to women using COCs., Methods: We searched the PubMed database for all English language articles published from database inception through May 2016. We included primary research studies that examined women using the patch, ring or combined injectables compared with women using levonorgestrel-containing or norgestimate-containing COCs. Outcomes of interest included VTE (deep venous thrombosis or pulmonary embolism) or ATE (acute myocardial infarction or ischemic stroke). We assessed the quality of each individual piece of evidence using the system developed by the United States Preventive Services Task Force., Results: Eight studies were identified that met inclusion criteria. Of seven analyses from six studies examining VTE among patch users compared with levonorgestrel- or norgestimate-containing COC users, two found a statistically significantly elevated risk among patch users (risk estimates 2.2-2.3), one found an elevated risk that did not meet statistical significance (risk estimate 2.0), and four found no increased risk. Of three studies examining VTE among ring users compared with levonorgestrel COC users, one found a statistically significantly elevated risk among patch users (risk estimate 1.9) and two did not. Two studies did not find an increased risk for ATE among women using the patch compared with norgestimate COCs. We did not identify any studies examining combined injectable contraceptives., Conclusion: Limited Level II-2 good to fair evidence demonstrated conflicting results on whether women using the patch or the ring have a higher risk of VTE than women using COCs. Evidence did not demonstrate an increased risk of ATE among women using the patch. Overall, any potential elevated risk likely represents a small number of events on a population level. Additional studies with standard methodology are needed to further clarify any associations and better understand mechanisms of hormone-induced thrombosis among users of nonoral combined hormonal contraception., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objective: To evaluate from the literature whether combined hormonal contraception (CHC), including combined oral contraception pills (COCs), transdermal patch, vaginal ring or combined injectables, have different effectiveness or failure rates by body weight or body mass index (BMI)., Study Design: We searched PubMed and the Cochrane Library databases for all articles in all languages published between inception and February 2016, for evidence relevant to body weight or BMI, CHC use and contraceptive effectiveness. The quality of each individual study was assessed using the system for evaluating evidence developed by the United States Preventive Services Task Force., Results: From 2874 articles, we identified 15 reports for inclusion, all of fair to poor quality. Fourteen studies measured the association of obesity status and contraceptive failure among COC users. Three fair quality and one poor quality study reported increased COC failure among a heterogeneous population of overweight and obese women compared with normal weight women, while eight fair quality and two poor quality studies did not find an association. Two fair quality studies reported on contraceptive transdermal patches. One pooled analysis described a higher proportion of pregnancies among women using the patch who weighed ≥90 kg; another secondary analysis suggested BMI>30 was associated with increased failure. No studies directly compared contraceptive effectiveness using the combined vaginal ring or combined injectable., Conclusion: Current available evidence addressing the risk of CHC failure in obese compared to normal weight women is limited to fair and poor quality studies. Studies of COCs show mixed results, though absolute differences in COC failure by body weight and BMI are small. Based on limited evidence, it appears that increasing body weight and BMI may contribute to decreasing contraceptive patch effectiveness., (Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objective: The objective was to determine the association between use of intrauterine devices (IUDs) by young women and risk of adverse outcomes., Methods: We searched Pubmed, CINAHL, Embase, Popline and the Cochrane Library for articles from inception of database through December 2015. For outcomes specific to IUD use (IUD expulsion and perforation), we examined effect measures for IUD users generally aged 25 years or younger compared with older IUD users. For outcomes of pregnancy, infection, pelvic inflammatory disease (PID), and heavy bleeding or anemia, we examined young IUD users compared with young users of other contraceptive methods or no method., Results: We identified 3169 articles of which 16 articles from 14 studies met our inclusion criteria. Six studies (Level II-2, good to poor) reported increased risk of expulsion among younger age groups compared with older age groups using copper-bearing (Cu-) IUDs. Two studies (Level II-2, fair) examined risks of expulsion among younger compared with older women using levonorgestrel-releasing (LNG-) IUDs; one reported no difference in expulsion, while the other reported increased odds for younger women. Four studies (Level II-2, good to poor) examined risk of expulsion among Cu- and LNG-IUD users combined and reported no significant differences between younger and older women. For perforation, four studies (Level II-2, fair to poor) found very low perforation rates (range, 0%-0.1%), with no significant differences between younger and older women. Pregnancies were generally rare among young IUD users in nine studies (Level I to II-2, fair to poor), and no differences were reported for young IUD users compared with young combined oral contraceptive (COC) or etonogestrel (ENG) implant users. PID was rare among young IUD users; one study reported no cases among COC or IUD users, and one reported no difference in PID among LNG-IUD users compared with ENG implant users from nationwide insurance claims data (Level I to II-2, fair). One study reported decreased odds of bleeding with LNG-IUD compared with COC use among young women, while one study of young women reported decreased odds of removal for bleeding with LNG-IUD compared with ENG implant (Level I to II-2, fair)., Conclusion: Overall evidence suggests that the risk of adverse outcomes related to pregnancy, perforation, infection, heavy bleeding or removals for bleeding among young IUD users is low and may not be clinically meaningful. However, the risk of expulsion, especially for Cu-IUDs, is higher for younger women compared with older women. If IUD expulsion occurs, a young woman is exposed to an increased risk of unintended pregnancy if replacement contraception is not initiated. IUDs are safe for young women and provide highly effective reversible contraception., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objectives: St. John's wort (SJW) is a known strong inducer of the cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3 A4 enzyme, and both the ethinyl estradiol and progestin components of hormonal contraceptives are substrates of CYP3A4. This systematic review examined whether the co-administration of SJW and hormonal contraceptives leads to significant safety or efficacy concerns., Study Design: Systematic review., Methods: PubMed and Cochrane Library databases were searched for articles of any comparative study design (clinical or pharmacokinetic) that examined potential interactions between SJW and hormonal contraceptives in women of reproductive age., Results: Of the 48 identified articles, four studies met inclusion criteria and compared use of combined oral contraceptives (COCs) alone to the use of COCs co-administered with SJW. Two studies demonstrated no change in markers of ovulation, but one study demonstrated increased follicular growth and probable ovulation when COCs were co-administered with SJW. Three studies demonstrated an increased risk of breakthrough bleeding with COCs and SJW. Three studies showed changes in at least one pharmacokinetic parameter that suggested a significantly decreased exposure to hormone concentrations when COCs were co-administered with SJW. The only study that did not demonstrate any significant pharmacokinetic differences examined a SJW product containing a low amount of hypericin., Conclusion: Limited evidence showing increased risk of ovulation and breakthrough bleeding raises concern for decreased contraceptive efficacy when COCs are co-administered with SJW. The pharmacokinetic evidence is mixed but suggests that SJW administration may be associated with weak to moderate induction of the metabolism of COCs., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Women with medical conditions associated with increased risk for thrombosis generally should not use estrogen-containing contraceptives; however, less is known about progestin-only contraceptives (POCs) and thrombosis risk., Objectives: The objective was to identify evidence regarding the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) or arterial thromboembolism [stroke or acute myocardial infarction (AMI)] among women using POCs., Methods: We searched the PubMed database for all articles published from database inception through January 2016 for studies examining thrombosis among women using POCs. We included studies which examined women with medical conditions associated with thrombosis risk, as well as studies of women in the general population (either without these conditions or who were not specified to have these conditions). Hormonal contraceptives of interest included progestin-only pills (POPs), injectables, implants and levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine devices (LNG-IUDs). Outcomes of interest included VTE, stroke and AMI., Results: There were 26 articles of good to poor quality that met inclusion criteria; 9 studies examined women with medical conditions and 20 examined women in the general population. Two studies found that, among smokers and women with certain thrombogenic mutations, use of depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA) had elevated odds of VTE compared with nonsmokers or those without mutations, although confidence intervals were wide and overlapped with odds among nonusers. One study found that, among women with previous VTE, use of POCs (including DMPA) was associated with a nonsignificant increased odds of recurrent VTE (all of which were among DMPA users); two other studies that examined POCs other than DMPA did not observe an association with recurrent VTE. Two studies found that use of DMPA among healthy women was also associated with increased odds of VTE. Two studies found that use of POCs for therapeutic indications was associated with increased odds of VTE. Studies did not find increased odds of VTE with POPs for contraceptive purposes, implants or LNG-IUDs nor were there increased odds of stroke or AMI with any POCs., Conclusion: The majority of evidence identified by this systematic review did not suggest an increase in odds for venous or arterial events with use of most POCs. Limited evidence suggested increased odds of VTE with use of injectables (three studies) and use of POCs for therapeutic indications (two studies, one with POCs unspecified and the other with POPs). Any increase in risk likely translates to a small increase in absolute numbers of thrombotic events at the population level., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Contraception is an important consideration for women with multiple sclerosis (MS); however, little is known about the possible effects of hormonal contraception on disease progression or other adverse outcomes (e.g., thrombosis, low bone mineral density)., Objective: To evaluate the evidence on the safety of contraceptive use among women with MS., Search Strategy: We searched the PubMed database for peer-reviewed articles published in any language from database inception through July 2015., Selection Criteria: We included studies that examined health outcomes among women diagnosed with MS initiating or continuing a contraceptive method. We excluded case reports and case series but included all other study designs., Results: From 111 articles, we identified four studies (from 5 articles) that met our inclusion criteria. Evidence from one randomized controlled trial, two retrospective cohort studies, and one cross-sectional study suggests that use of combined oral contraceptives (COCs) or oral contraceptives (OCs) (type not specified) among women with MS does not worsen the clinical course of disease, defined as disability level, disease severity or progression, relapse or number of new brain lesions on magnetic resonance imaging (body of evidence grading Level I, fair to Level II-3, poor). No studies were identified that examined the safety of other contraceptive methods or examined other outcomes of interest (venous thromboembolism, changes in bone mineral density) related to contraceptive use among women with MS., Conclusions: Limited evidence suggests that COC or OC use after MS onset does not worsen the clinical course of disease., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objectives: To investigate levonorgestrel (LNG)-releasing and copper-bearing (Cu) intrauterine device (IUD) safety among breastfeeding women and, for Cu-IUD use, breastfeeding performance and infant health., Study Design: Systematic review., Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and clinicaltrials.gov for articles through January 2016. We included studies of Cu-IUD or LNG-IUD users comparing IUD-specific (perforation, expulsion) and other contraceptive-related (infection, removal/cessation due to bleeding/pain and other adverse events) outcomes for breastfeeding vs. non-breastfeeding women. We also included studies of breastfeeding women comparing contraceptive-related outcome for IUD-users vs. other contraceptive-method users. Finally, we included studies comparing breastfeeding outcomes among Cu-IUD users to users of other nonhormonal contraceptives or no contraception., Results: Of 548 articles identified, 23 (16 studies) met the inclusion criteria. Two studies suggested that the risk of IUD perforation was 6-10 times higher among breastfeeding vs. non-breastfeeding women. Seven studies suggested that risks for other adverse events were similar or lower among breastfeeding vs. non-breastfeeding women. Three studies among breastfeeding women found no increased risk of adverse events in IUD users vs. nonusers. Breastfeeding performance and infant growth were similar for Cu-IUD users and users of other nonhormonal methods or no contraception., Conclusion: Overall, risks for adverse events among IUD users, including expulsion, pain and removals, were similar or lower for breastfeeding women vs. non-breastfeeding women. Uterine perforation with IUDs, while rare, appeared more frequent among breastfeeding women. No evidence indicated that Cu-IUD use in breastfeeding women influences breastfeeding performance or infant growth., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Women with depressive or bipolar disorders are at an increased risk for unintended pregnancy., Objective: To examine the safety of hormonal contraception among women with depressive and bipolar disorders., Methods: We searched for articles published through January 2016 on the safety of using any hormonal contraceptive method among women with depressive or bipolar disorders, including those who had been diagnosed clinically or scored above threshold levels on a validated screening instrument. Outcomes included changes in symptoms, hospitalization, suicide and modifications in medication regimens such as increase or decrease in dosage or changes in type of drug., Results: Of 2376 articles, 6 met the inclusion criteria. Of three studies that examined women clinically diagnosed with depressive or bipolar disorder, one found that oral contraceptives (OCs) did not significantly change mood across the menstrual cycle among women with bipolar disorder, whereas mood did significantly change across the menstrual cycle among women not using OCs; one found no significant differences in the frequency of psychiatric hospitalizations among women with bipolar disorder who used depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA), intrauterine devices (IUDs) or sterilization; and one found no increase in depression scale scores among women with depression using and not using OCs, for both those treated with fluoxetine and those receiving placebo. Of three studies that examined women who met a threshold for depression on a screening instrument, one found that adolescent girls using combined OCs (COCs) had significantly improved depression scores after 3 months compared with placebo, one found that OC users had similar odds of no longer being depressed at follow-up compared with nonusers, and one found that COC users were less frequently classified as depressed over 11 months than IUD users., Conclusions: Limited evidence from six studies found that OC, levonorgestrel-releasing IUD and DMPA use among women with depressive or bipolar disorders was not associated with worse clinical course of disease compared with no hormonal method use., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objective: The objective was to assess risk of pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) among women with current asymptomatic undiagnosed cervical infection or who are at high risk of sexually transmitted infections (STIs), comparing those who have a copper-bearing (Cu-) or levonorgestrel (LNG-) intrauterine device (IUD) placed with women who do not., Study Design: We searched PubMed and Cochrane Library for articles from January 1984 through January 2016 addressing our objective. We assessed study quality using the United States Preventive Services Task Force evidence grading system., Results: Our search strategy yielded 2220 articles, of which 10 met inclusion criteria. Two studies provided direct evidence of PID rates in women with undiagnosed gonococcal or chlamydial (GC/CT) infection or at high risk for STIs initiating IUDs versus other contraceptive methods (level II-2, fair to poor), and neither study found a difference. Eight studies provided indirect evidence (II-2 to II-3, fair to poor). One study found no difference in PID rates between initiators of Cu- versus LNG-IUDs. Five studies compared algorithms based on patient factors with laboratory GC/CT screening to predict cervical infection. Based on likelihood ratios, none of these algorithms adequately identified women at high risk of asymptomatic cervical infection who should not undergo IUD placement. Two studies compared IUD placement on the same day as STI screening with delayed placement after screening and found no difference in PID rates., Conclusion: Limited evidence suggests that IUD placement does not increase the risk of PID compared with no IUD placement among women with asymptomatic undiagnosed cervical infection or at high risk of STIs. Algorithms based on patient characteristics to identify women with asymptomatic GC/CT may be overly restrictive, leading to missed opportunities for IUD initiation. Historical concerns about higher PID risk among women at risk for STIs who use IUDs may not be relevant with modern devices and STI screening and treatment practices., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Context: Combined hormonal contraceptive (CHC) use may modify the risk of cardiovascular events in obese [body mass index (BMI) ≥30kg/m 2 ] women., Objective: The objective was to evaluate from the literature whether CHC use modifies the risk of acute myocardial infarction (AMI), stroke, cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) in obese women and to evaluate evidence for a dose-response relationship between BMI and VTE., Methods: We searched PubMed for all articles published between database inception and February 2016 providing direct evidence on BMI, CHCs, and cardiovascular outcomes. We also searched for indirect evidence related to a dose-response relationship between BMI and risk of VTE in the general population, as these data were lacking for CHC users. The quality of each individual study was assessed using the system for grading evidence developed by the United States Preventive Services Task Force., Results: The direct evidence search yielded 3 pooled analyses, 11 case-control studies and 1 cohort study. There was conflicting evidence about the risk of AMI or stroke among obese combined oral contraceptive (COC) users compared to obese nonusers, with one study finding no increased risk for AMI or stroke for COC users overall or stratified by BMI. A second study found significantly increased risk of AMI and stroke for COC users, with the highest risk estimates for high-BMI COC users. A single study suggested that obese COC users may be at higher risk for CVT compared with normal-weight nonusers. For VTE, obese COC users consistently had a risk that was 5 to 8 times that of obese nonusers and approximately 10 times that of nonobese nonusers. Five prospective cohort studies were identified as indirect evidence, and all found increased risk for VTE as BMI increased, suggesting a dose-response relationship between BMI and risk for VTE. No studies on the contraceptive patch or vaginal ring were identified that met the inclusion criteria., Conclusion: Limited evidence of Level II-2, fair quality, concerning whether CHC use modifies the risk of AMI and stroke in obese women is inconclusive, while a single study of Level II-2, poor quality, found that obese COC users may be at higher risk for CVT compared with normal-weight nonusers. Both COC use and higher BMI increase risk for VTE, and the greatest relative risks are for those with both risk factors based on a body of evidence graded as Level II-2, fair to poor quality. It is not possible to estimate absolute risk of VTE among women with both of these risk factors; however, the absolute risk of VTE in healthy women of reproductive age is small., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objective: This study aims to determine whether emergency contraceptive pills (ECPs) are less safe and effective for women with obesity compared with those without obesity., Study Design: We searched PubMed for articles through November 2015 regarding the safety and effectiveness of ECPs [ulipristal acetate (UPA), levonorgestrel (LNG) and combined estrogen and progestin] among obese users. We assessed study quality using the United States Preventive Services Task Force evidence grading system., Results: We identified four pooled secondary analyses (quality: poor to fair), two of which examined UPA and three examined LNG formulations. Three analyses pooled overlapping data from a total of three primary studies and demonstrated significant associations between obesity and risk of pregnancy after ECP use. One analysis reported a 4-fold increased risk of pregnancy among women with obesity (BMI≥30kg/m 2 ) compared with women within normal/underweight categories (BMI<25kg/m 2 ) after use of LNG ECPs [odds ratio (OR) 4.4; 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.0-9.4]. Further analysis of the same LNG data found that, at an approximate weight of 80 kg, the rate of pregnancy rose above 6%, which is the estimated pregnancy probability without contraception; at weights less than 75 kg, the rate of pregnancy was less than 2%. Two analyses examining UPA suggested an approximate 2-fold increased risk of pregnancy among women with obesity compared with either normal/underweight women or nonobese (BMI<30kg/m 2 ) women (OR 2.6; 95% CI 0.9-7.0 and OR 2.1; 95% CI 1.0-4.3, respectively), but CIs were wide. Finally, the fourth secondary analysis pooled data from three separate randomized controlled trials on LNG ECPs and found no increase in pregnancy risk with increasing weight or BMI and found no consistent association between pregnancy and both factors when adjusted for other covariates., Conclusion: While data are limited and poor to fair quality, findings suggest that women with obesity experience an increased risk of pregnancy after use of LNG ECP compared with those normal/underweight. Women with obesity may also experience an increased risk of pregnancy compared with women without obesity after use of UPA ECP, though differences did not reach statistical significance. Providers should counsel all women at risk for unintended pregnancy, including those with obesity, about the effectiveness of the full range of emergency contraception options in order for them to understand their options, to receive advanced supplies of emergency contraception as needed and to understand how to access an emergency copper intrauterine device if desired., (Copyright © 2016. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Potential barriers to intrauterine device (IUD) use include provider concern about difficult insertion, particularly for nulliparous women., Objective: This study aims to evaluate the evidence on the effectiveness of medications to ease IUD insertion on provider outcomes (i.e., ease of insertion, need for adjunctive insertion measures, insertion success)., Search Strategy: We searched the PubMed database for peer-reviewed articles published in any language from database inception through February 2016., Selection Criteria: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that examined medications to ease interval insertion of levonorgestrel-releasing IUDs and copper T IUDs., Results: From 1855 articles, we identified 15 RCTs that met our inclusion criteria. Most evidence suggested that misoprostol did not improve provider ease of insertion, reduce the need for adjunctive insertion measures or improve insertion success among general samples of women seeking an IUD (evidence Level I, good to fair). However, one RCT found significantly higher insertion success among women receiving misoprostol prior to a second IUD insertion attempt after failed attempt versus placebo (evidence Level I, good). Two RCTs on 2% intracervical lidocaine as a topical gel or injection suggested no positive effect on provider ease of insertion (evidence Level I, good to poor), and one RCT on diclofenac plus 2% intracervical lidocaine as a topical gel suggested no positive effect on provider ease of insertion (evidence Level I, good). Limited evidence from two RCTs on nitric oxide donors, specifically nitroprusside or nitroglycerin gel, suggested no positive effect on provider ease of insertion or need for adjunctive insertion measures (evidence Level I, fair)., Conclusions: Overall, most studies found no significant differences between women receiving interventions to ease IUD insertion versus controls. Among women with a recent failed insertion who underwent a second insertion attempt, one RCT found improved insertion success among women using misoprostol versus placebo., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Use of highly effective contraception among women living with HIV is critical to prevent unintended pregnancy and subsequent risk of maternal complications and perinatal HIV transmission. However, it is not known whether use of intrauterine devices (IUDs) among women with advanced HIV disease poses an increased risk of pelvic infection or HIV progression and transmission., Objectives: To identify evidence regarding the risk of pelvic infection, HIV disease progression or HIV transmission among women with HIV using IUDs and whether this risk differs by severity of HIV disease., Methods: We searched the PubMed database for all articles published from database inception through January 2016. For the outcome of pelvic infection, we included studies that examined women using IUDs and reported risk of pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) or pelvic infections among women with varying levels of HIV severity or among women with HIV compared with women without HIV. For the outcomes of HIV disease progression and HIV transmission to noninfected male partners, we included studies of women with HIV using IUDs compared with other contraceptive methods or no method., Results: The review identified eight articles from six study populations which addressed pelvic infections or other IUD-related complications and found mixed results. One study that directly compared women with varying levels of HIV disease severity found no differences in complication rates between those with severe or mild disease after short- and longer-term follow-up. The remaining studies generally found low or no incidence of PID among IUD users. Among eight articles from seven study populations that reported on HIV disease progression, there were generally no differences between women using IUDs compared with other contraceptives, nor were there changes between baseline and follow-up. One article that reported directly on HIV disease transmission to noninfected male partners found no difference in HIV disease transmission, and five articles found no differences in genital viral shedding among women using IUDs. No direct evidence addresses potential differences in HIV disease progression or transmission by HIV disease severity., Conclusion: Limited evidence of fair to poor quality found no differences in infectious complications when comparing IUD complication rates among women with varying levels of HIV disease severity. One study found that IUD use was not associated with HIV transmission, and studies generally found no differences in genital viral shedding or disease progression; however, there was little direct evidence to address potential differences related to HIV severity., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Migraine is common among women of reproductive age and is associated with an increased risk of ischemic stroke. Combined oral contraceptives (COCs) are also associated with an increased risk of ischemic stroke. Use of hormonal contraception among women with migraine might further elevate the risk of stroke among women of reproductive age., Objective: To identify evidence regarding the risk of arterial thromboembolism (stroke or myocardial infarction) among women with migraine who use hormonal contraceptives., Methods: We searched the PubMed database for all articles published from database inception through January 2016. We included studies that examined women with migraine overall or separated by subtype (with or without aura). Hormonal contraceptives of interest included combined hormonal methods (COCs, patch and ring) and progestin-only methods (progestin-only pills, injectables, implants and progestin intrauterine devices)., Results: Seven articles met inclusion criteria. All were case-control studies of fair to poor quality reporting on use of COCs or oral contraceptives (OCs) not further described and all reported stroke outcomes. Four studies demonstrated that, among women with migraine (not separated by subtype), COC use was associated with approximately two to four times the risk of stroke compared with nonuse. The only study to examine specific migraine subtypes found an elevated risk of stroke among women with migraine with aura, and this risk was similar regardless of OC use, although these odds ratios were not reported. Two studies did not report risks among women with migraine and COC use combined, but both found increased risks of stroke with migraine and COC use independently. No evidence was found on other hormonal contraceptives or on risk of myocardial infarction., Conclusion: Limited evidence suggests a two- to fourfold increased risk of stroke among women with migraine who use COCs compared with nonuse. Additional study is needed on the risks of hormonal contraceptives, including combined and progestin-only methods, among women with different migraine subtypes., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: With dramatic improvements in life expectancy for cystic fibrosis (CF) patients, contraception for women with CF has become an important issue. There are theoretical concerns that hormonal contraceptive use among women with CF may impact disease severity or risk for other adverse health outcomes, including thrombosis and poor bone health, as well as concerns that malabsorption or altered drug metabolism might impact contraceptive effectiveness., Objective: To evaluate evidence on the safety and effectiveness of contraceptive methods among women with CF., Search Strategy: We searched the PubMed database for all articles published from database inception through October 2015., Selection Criteria: We included studies that examined measures of disease severity, other health outcomes or indicators of contraceptive effectiveness among women with CF initiating or continuing a contraceptive method., Results: Seven studies met our inclusion criteria. Three observational studies of fair to poor quality suggest that use of oral contraceptives (OCs) does not negatively impact CF disease severity, defined as changes in pulmonary function, number of exacerbations or need for intravenous antibiotics. Three small studies of poor quality reported on contraceptive failure among women with CF using combined hormonal contraceptives (combined OCs, patch or ring). One pregnancy was reported in a patch user out of 43 hormonal contraceptive users across all studies. One pharmacokinetic study reported that women with CF achieve steroid hormone plasma concentrations similar to healthy women after ingestion of combined OCs., Conclusions: Limited evidence suggests that hormonal contraceptive use does not negatively impact disease severity among women with CF and that hormonal contraceptive effectiveness is not impaired by CF. Studies were limited by small sample sizes and short duration of follow-up. No studies examined the effect of hormonal contraception on thrombosis or bone health among women with CF., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objective: To examine whether the co-administration of hormonal contraceptives (HC) and psychotropic drugs commonly used to treat anxiety and/or depression results in safety or efficacy concerns for either drug., Methods: We searched PubMed and Cochrane libraries for clinical or pharmacokinetic (PK) studies that examined co-administration of any HC with psychotropic drugs [selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs), oral benzodiazepines, bupropion, mirtazapine, trazadone, buspirone, hydroxyzine, monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs), or atypical antipsychotics] in reproductive aged women., Results: Of 555 articles identified, 22 articles (18 studies) met inclusion criteria. We identified 5 studies on SSRIs, four on TCAs, one on bupropion, three on atypical antipsychotics and five on oral benzodiazepines. No articles met inclusion criteria for SNRIs, mirtazapine, trazadone, buspirone, hydroxyzine or MAOIs. Overall, clinical studies did not demonstrate differences in unintended pregnancy rates when HCs were administered with and without psychotropic drugs or in psychotropic drug treatment outcomes when psychotropic drugs were administered with and without HCs. PK studies did not demonstrate changes in drug exposure related to contraceptive safety, contraceptive effectiveness or psychotropic drug effectiveness for most classes of psychotropic drugs. However, limited PK data raise concern for HCs increasing systemic exposure of amitriptyline and imipramine (both TCAs), theoretically posing safety concerns., Conclusion: Limited quality and quantity evidence on use of psychotropic drugs and HCs suggests low concern for clinically significant interactions, though no data exist specifically for non-oral formulations of HC. Given the high frequency of use for both HCs and psychotropic drugs among reproductive-age women in the US, this review highlights a need for further research in this area., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Postpartum women need effective contraception. Concerns have been raised that use of progestogen-only contraceptives (POCs) may affect breastfeeding performance and infant health outcomes., Objectives: We investigated the clinical outcomes of breastfeeding duration, initiation of supplemental feeding and weaning, as well as infant outcomes including infant growth, health and development among breastfeeding women using POCs compared with breastfeeding women not using POCs., Search Strategy: We searched the PubMed database for all articles published from database inception through December 2014., Selection Criteria: We included primary research studies of breastfeeding women of any age or parity who received POCs, including progestogen-only pills, injectables, implants or hormonal intrauterine devices (IUDs). The main outcomes were breastfeeding performance (as measured by initiation, continuation, frequency and exclusivity of breastfeeding) and infant health (as measured by growth, development or adverse health effects)., Results: Forty-nine articles reporting on 47 different studies were identified that investigated the use of POCs in breastfeeding women and reported clinically relevant outcomes of infant growth, health or breastfeeding performance. Studies ranged from poor to fair methodological quality and generally failed to show negative effects of the use of POCs on breastfeeding outcomes or on infant growth or development. One randomized controlled trial (RCT) raises concerns that immediate insertion of the levonorgestrel IUD postpartum may be associated with poorer breastfeeding performance when compared with delayed insertion, although two other RCTs evaluating early etonogestrel implants compared with delayed initiation of implants or depot medroxyprogesterone acetate failed to find such an association., Conclusion: The preponderance of evidence fails to demonstrate adverse breastfeeding outcomes or negative health outcomes in infants such as restricted growth, health problems or impaired development. Evidence newly added to this review was largely consistent with previous evidence., (Copyright © 2016. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Superficial venous disease, which includes superficial venous thrombosis (SVT) and varicose veins, may be associated with a higher risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Use of combined hormonal contraceptives (CHCs) has been associated with an increased risk of VTE compared with nonuse. Little is known about whether use of CHCs by women with superficial venous disease may further elevate the risk of VTE., Objectives: To investigate evidence regarding risk of VTE in women with SVT or varicose veins who use CHCs compared with non-CHC users., Methods: We searched the PubMed database for all English-language articles published from database inception through September 2014. We included primary research studies that examined women with SVT or varicose veins who used CHCs compared to women with these conditions who did not use CHCs. Outcomes of interest included VTE (among women with SVT or varicose veins) and SVT (for those with varicose veins)., Results: Two studies were identified that met inclusion criteria. One fair-quality case-control study reported an odds ratio (OR) for VTE of 43.0 (95% confidence interval [CI] 15.5-119.3) among women with SVT using oral contraceptives (OCs) compared with nonusers without SVT. The OR for VTE was also increased for women with SVT not using OCs (OR 5.1; 95% CI 2.8-9.5) and for women without SVT using OCs (OR 4.0; 95% CI 3.3-4.7), compared with nonusers without SVT. One fair-quality cohort study demonstrated that women with varicose veins had an increased rate of VTE with use of OCs (1.85 per 1000 women-years [WY]), compared with users without varicose veins (0.84 per 1000 WY), nonusers with varicose veins (0.31 per 1000 WY) and nonusers without varicose veins (0.19 per 1000 WY). This study also demonstrated that women with varicose veins had an increased rate of SVT with use of OCs (10.63 per 1000 WY), compared with nonusers with varicose veins (7.59 per 1000 WY), users without varicose veins (1.89 per 1000 WY) and nonusers without varicose veins (0.77 per 1000 WY)., Conclusion: Two studies suggest increased risk of VTE among OC users with superficial venous disease; however, no definitive conclusions can be made due to the limited number of studies and limitations in study quality. Theoretical concerns need to be clarified with further research on whether the risk of significant sequelae from superficial venous disease among CHC users is related to clinical severity of disease and underlying factors., (Copyright © 2016. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Contraception is important for women who are postpartum, including those who are breastfeeding. Use of combined hormonal contraceptives (CHCs) may affect breastfeeding performance and infant health outcomes., Objective: The objective was to identify evidence examining clinical outcomes for breastfeeding and infant health among breastfeeding women using CHCs compared to nonusers., Search Strategy: We searched the PubMed database for all articles published from database inception through September 30, 2014., Selection Criteria: We included primary research studies that compared breastfeeding women using CHCs with breastfeeding women using nonhormonal or no contraception, or compared breastfeeding women initiating combined hormonal contraception at early versus later times postpartum. Breastfeeding outcomes of interest included duration, rate of exclusive breastfeeding and timing of supplementation. Infant outcomes of interest included growth, health and development., Results: Fifteen articles describing 13 studies met inclusion criteria for this review. Studies ranged from poor to fair methodological quality and demonstrated inconsistent effects of combined oral contraceptives (COCs) on breastfeeding performance with COC initiation before or after 6 weeks postpartum; some studies demonstrated greater supplementation and decreased breastfeeding continuation among COC users compared with nonusers, and others demonstrated no effect. For infant outcomes, some studies found decreases in infant weight gain for COC users compared with nonusers when COCs were initiated at <6 weeks postpartum, while other studies found no effect. None of the studies found an effect on infant weight gain when COCs were started after 6 weeks postpartum, and no studies found an effect on other infant health outcomes regardless of time of COC initiation., Conclusion: Limited evidence of poor to fair quality demonstrates an inconsistent impact of COCs on breastfeeding duration and success. The evidence also demonstrated conflicting results on whether early initiation of COCs affects infant outcomes but generally found no negative impact on infant outcomes with later initiation of COCs. The body of evidence is limited by older studies using different formulations and doses of estrogen and poor methodologic quality. Given the significant limitations of this body of evidence, the importance of contraception for postpartum women and the theoretical concerns that have been raised about the use of combined hormonal contraception by women who are breastfeeding, rigorous studies examining these issues are needed. In addition, postpartum women should be counseled about the full range of safe alternative contraceptive methods, particularly during the first 6 weeks postpartum when the risk of venous thromboembolism is highest and use of estrogen may exacerbate this risk., (Copyright © 2016. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objectives: This study aims to systematically review evidence published on the safety of Sino-implant (II) [SI (II)] among women with medical conditions or characteristics identified by the World Health Organization for eligibility for contraceptive use., Study Design: We searched PubMed, WEIPU, CNKI and Wanfang to identify all relevant evidence published in peer-reviewed journals from 1991 through 2014 regarding the safety of SI (II). We considered studies among women with medical conditions or other characteristics, such as age and parity, as direct evidence and studies among healthy women or a general population of women as indirect evidence., Results: We identified 108 articles of which 9 met our inclusion criteria. Among women with medical conditions, no evidence was identified for the outcomes of interest, including serious adverse events or outcomes related to medical conditions. Among healthy women, evidence regarding efficacy of SI (II) for women weighing ≥70 kg was conflicting; one study showed an increased pregnancy rate and another showed no relationship. Women with menorrhagia did not experience worsened symptoms and may benefit from SI (II) use. Healthy women using SI (II) were no more likely than users of other methods to gain weight, develop elevated blood pressure, have abnormal liver or bone density tests or develop ovarian cysts or uterine myomas., Conclusions: Evidence among healthy women suggests SI (II) is safe and had health outcomes similar to those of other levonorgestrel implants. Studies were limited and conflicting regarding efficacy for women ≥70 kg. All included studies were conducted in China, limiting generalizability., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Context: Dyslipidemias represent a spectrum of lipid disorders that are important risk factors for cardiovascular disease. In addition, elevated triglycerides are known to be associated with pancreatitis. Though less clear, it is possible that dyslipidemias may also contribute to risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE). Ethinyl estradiol and progestogen, contained within combined hormonal contraception, are known to impact lipid metabolism., Objectives: To evaluate from the literature whether use of combined hormonal contraception (CHC), including combined oral contraception (COC) pills, transdermal patch, vaginal ring or injectables, modifies the relative risk of acute myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, VTE or pancreatitis among women with known dyslipidemias and to determine if existing lipid abnormalities worsen with CHC use., Methods: PubMed and the Cochrane Library databases were searched for all articles in all languages published between inception and September 2014 relevant to dyslipidemia, CHC use and serious adverse events (MI, stroke, VTE or pancreatitis). The quality of each individual study was assessed using the system for grading evidence developed by the United States Preventive Services Task Force., Results: From 306 articles identified by our search strategy, 3 articles met inclusion criteria. In a poor-quality case-control study, women with hypercholesterolemia but no COC use had an increased risk of MI (adjusted odds ratio [adj OR] 3.3, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.6-6.8), as did women who used COCs but did not have hypercholesterolemia (adj OR 2.0, 95% CI 1.4-2.8), compared with non-COC users without hypercholesterolemia; women with both COC use and hypercholesterolemia had an adjusted OR of 24.7 (95% CI 5.6-108.5) compared with women with neither risk factor. A poor-quality cohort study examined COC users and reported that women with dyslipidemia had increased risk for VTE [crude risk ratio (RR) 1.39, 95% CI 1.04-1.85] and transient ischemic attacks or cerebrovascular accidents (CVAs) (RR 1.76, 95% CI 1.51-2.06) compared to those without dyslipidemia. Another poor-quality cohort study provided direct evidence on changes in lipid levels among COC users with dyslipidemia. A minority of women with elevated total cholesterol or triglyceride levels at baseline showed normal results (25% and 28%, respectively) after 6 cycles of COC use. No evidence regarding risks associated with use of other CHC methods was identified. No evidence was identified for the outcome of pancreatitis., Conclusion: Limited data from poor-quality observational studies suggest that women with known dyslipidemias using CHC may be at increased risk for MI and may experience a minimal increase in risk for CVA or VTE. No evidence was identified on risk for pancreatitis in this context. The impact of CHC exposure on the status of lipid abnormalities over time, an intermediate marker for disease, is also unclear. Given the significant limitations of this body of evidence, the importance of access to effective contraception and theoretical concerns raised about the use of CHCs by women with known dyslipidemias, additional rigorous studies are needed to best estimate true associations. Contraceptive decision making should include consideration of both the known and theoretical risks of a given CHC method, safety and acceptability of alternative contraceptive methods, and risks associated with unintended pregnancy., (Copyright © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Little is known about unintended pregnancy risk and current contraceptive use among women ≥45 years old in the United States., Objectives: The purpose of this study was to describe the prevalence of women ages 45-50 years old at risk for unintended pregnancy and their current contraceptive use, and to compare these findings to those of women in younger age groups., Study Design: We analyzed 2006, 2008, and 2010 Massachusetts Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data, the only state in the United States to collect contraceptive data routinely from women >44 years old. Women 18-50 years old (n = 4930) were considered to be at risk for unintended pregnancy unless they reported current pregnancy, hysterectomy, not being sexually active in the past year, having a same-sex partner, or wanting to become pregnant. Among women who were considered to be at risk (n = 3605), we estimated the prevalence of current contraceptive use by age group. Among women who were considered to be at risk and who were 45-50 years old (n = 940), we examined characteristics that were associated with current method use. Analyses were conducted on weighted data using SAS-callable SUDAAN (RTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC)., Results: Among women who were 45-50 years old, 77.6% were at risk for unintended pregnancy, which was similar to other age groups. As age increased, hormonal contraceptive use (shots, pills, patch, or ring) decreased, and permanent contraception (tubal ligation or vasectomy) increased as did non-use of contraception. Of women who were 45-50 years old and at risk for unintended pregnancy, 66.9% reported using some contraceptive method; permanent contraception was the leading method reported by 44.0% and contraceptive non-use was reported by 16.8%., Conclusion: A substantial proportion of women who were 45-50 years old were considered to be at risk for unintended pregnancy. Permanent contraception was most commonly used by women in this age group. Compared with other age groups, more women who were 45-50 years old were not using any contraception. Population-based surveillance efforts are needed to follow trends among this age group and better meet their family planning needs. Although expanding surveillance systems to include women through 50 years old requires additional resources, fertility trends that show increasingly delayed childbearing, uncertain end of fecundity, and potential adverse consequences of unplanned pregnancy in older age may justify these expenditures., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Women who use combined hormonal contraceptives and cigarettes have an increased risk for cardiovascular (CV) events. We reviewed the literature to determine whether women who use hormonal contraceptives (HC) and electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) also have an increased risk., Study Design: Systematic review., Methods: We searched for articles reporting myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, venous thromboembolism, peripheral arterial disease or changes to CV markers in women using e-cigarettes and HC. We also searched for indirect evidence, such as CV outcomes among e-cigarette users in the general population and among HC users exposed to nicotine, propylene glycol or glycerol., Results: No articles reported on outcomes among e-cigarette users using HC. Among the general population, 13 articles reported on heart rate or blood pressure after e-cigarette use. These markers generally remained normal, even when significant changes were observed. In three studies, changes were less pronounced after e-cigarette use than cigarette use. One MI was reported among 1012 people exposed to e-cigarettes in these studies. One article on nicotine and HC exposure found both exposures to be significantly associated with acute changes to heart rate, though mean heart rate remained normal. No articles on propylene glycol or glycerol and HC exposure were identified., Conclusion: We identified no evidence on CV outcomes among e-cigarette users using HC. Limited data reporting mostly acute outcomes suggested that CV events are rare among e-cigarette users in the general population and that e-cigarettes may affect heart rate and blood pressure less than conventional cigarettes. There is a need for research assessing joint HC and e-cigarette exposure on clinical CV outcomes., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Unlabelled: The World Health Organization (WHO) and the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) provide recommendations for use of emergency contraceptive pills (ECPs), including levonorgestrel (LNG) and combined oral contraceptives (COCs). A new ECP formulation, ulipristal acetate (UPA), is now available worldwide. To determine whether LNG, UPA or COC (Yuzpe) ECPs are safe for women with certain characteristics or medical conditions, we searched the PubMed and Cochrane databases for articles published from date of inception until May 2015 pertaining to the safety of LNG, UPA or Yuzpe ECP use. For direct evidence, we considered studies that looked at safety outcomes among women with certain medical conditions or characteristics taking ECPs compared with women not taking ECPs. For indirect evidence, we considered studies that reported pharmacokinetic (PK) data for ECP use among women with certain medical conditions or characteristics and studies that reported safety outcomes among healthy women taking ECPs. Five studies provided direct evidence; of these five studies, four examined LNG or Yuzpe use among pregnant or breastfeeding women, and one reported risk of ectopic pregnancy among women repeatedly using LNG ECPs. Poor pregnancy outcomes were rare among pregnant women who used LNG or Yuzpe ECPs during the conception cycle or early pregnancy. Breastfeeding outcomes did not differ between women exposed to LNG ECP and those unexposed, and there was no increased risk of ectopic pregnancy versus intrauterine pregnancy after repeated use of LNG ECPs compared with nonuse. Forty-five studies provided indirect evidence. One PK study demonstrated that LNG passes into breastmilk but in minimal quantities. In addition, nine studies examined pregnancy outcomes following ECP failure among healthy women, and 35 articles reported adverse events. Studies suggest that serious adverse events are rare among women taking any of these ECP formulations., Implications: Evidence on safety of ECPs among women with characteristics or medical conditions listed within WHO and CDC family planning guidance is limited. However, both direct and indirect evidence for our study question did not suggest any special safety concerns for the use of ECPs among women with particular medical conditions or personal characteristics, such as pregnancy, lactation or frequent ECP use., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Hormonal contraceptives are important for the health and well-being of some women living with HIV, so evaluation of evidence regarding their safety vis-à-vis HIV-related risks is important., Methods: We updated two prior systematic reviews on the impact of hormonal contraception (HC) on HIV disease progression and female-to-male HIV transmission., Results: One new study finds no increased risk for HIV disease progression or death associated with oral contraceptive use [adjusted (adj) hazard ratio (HR) 0.83, confidence interval [CI] 0.48-1.44] or injectables (adj HR 0.72, CI 0.53-0.98). Three new studies did not find significantly increased risks for measures of female-to-male HIV transmission with HC use., Conclusions: Hormonal contraceptive methods do not appear to accelerate HIV disease progression. More research is needed to clarify whether HC impacts HIV transmissibility., (Copyright © 2016. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objective: To examine the associations between hormonal contraceptive use and measures of HIV disease progression and antiretroviral treatment (ART) effectiveness., Study Design: A prospective cohort study of women with prevalent HIV infection in St. Petersburg, Russia, was conducted. After contraceptive counseling, participants chose to use combined oral contraceptives (COCs), depot-medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA), a copper intrauterine device (IUD) or male condoms for pregnancy prevention. Among participants not using ART at enrollment, we used multivariate Cox regression to assess the association between current (time-varying) contraceptive use and disease progression, measured by the primary composite outcome of CD4 decline to <350 cells/mm(3), ART initiation or death. Among participants using ART at enrollment, we used linear mixed models to estimate the predicted mean CD4 change at select time points by contraceptive method., Results: During a total of 5233 months follow-up among participants not using ART with enrollment CD4 ≥350 cells/mm(3) (n=315), 97 experienced disease progression. Neither current use of COCs [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 0.91, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.56-1.48] nor DMPA (aHR 1.28, 95% CI 0.71-2.31) was associated with a statistically significant increased risk for disease progression compared with use of nonhormonal methods (IUD or condoms). Among participants using ART at enrollment (n=77), we found no statistically significant differences in the predicted mean changes in CD4 cell count comparing current use of COCs (p=.1) or DMPA (p=.3) with nonhormonal methods., Conclusion: Hormonal contraceptive use was not significantly associated with measures of HIV disease progression or ART effectiveness among women with prevalent HIV infection., Implications: Hormonal contraceptive use was not significantly associated with measures of HIV disease progression or ART effectiveness among women with prevalent HIV infection., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objective: The objective of the study was to examine the associations between prenatal and postpartum contraceptive counseling and postpartum contraceptive use., Study Design: The Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System 2004-2008 data were analyzed from Missouri, New York state, and New York City (n = 9536). We used multivariable logistic regression to assess the associations between prenatal and postpartum contraceptive counseling and postpartum contraceptive use, defined as any method and more effective methods (sterilization, intrauterine device, or hormonal methods)., Results: The majority of women received prenatal (78%) and postpartum (86%) contraceptive counseling; 72% received both. Compared with those who received no counseling, those counseled during 1 time period (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 2.10; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.65-2.67) and both time periods (AOR, 2.33; 95% CI, 1.87-2.89) had significantly increased odds of postpartum use of a more effective contraceptive method (32% vs 49% and 56%, respectively; P for trend < .0001). Results for counseling during both time periods differed by type of health insurance before pregnancy, with greater odds of postpartum use of a more effective method observed for women with no insurance (AOR, 3.51; 95% CI, 2.18-5.66) and Medicaid insurance (AOR, 3.74; 95% CI, 1.98-7.06) than for those with private insurance (AOR, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.44-2.43) before pregnancy. Findings were similar for postpartum use of any contraceptive method, except that no differences by insurance status were detected., Conclusion: The prevalence of postpartum contraceptive use, including the use of more effective methods, was highest when contraceptive counseling was provided during both prenatal and postpartum time periods. Women with Medicaid or no health insurance before pregnancy benefited the most., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Whether use of various types of hormonal contraception (HC) affect risk of HIV acquisition is a critical question for women's health. For this systematic review, we identified 22 studies published by January 15, 2014 which met inclusion criteria; we classified thirteen studies as having severe methodological limitations, and nine studies as "informative but with important limitations". Overall, data do not support an association between use of oral contraceptives and increased risk of HIV acquisition. Uncertainty persists regarding whether an association exists between depot-medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA) use and risk of HIV acquisition. Most studies suggested no significantly increased HIV risk with norethisterone enanthate (NET-EN) use, but when assessed in the same study, point estimates for NET-EN tended to be larger than for DMPA, though 95% confidence intervals overlapped substantially. No data have suggested significantly increased risk of HIV acquisition with use of implants, though data were limited. No data are available on the relationship between use of contraceptive patches, rings, or hormonal intrauterine devices and risk of HIV acquisition. Women choosing progestin-only injectable contraceptives such as DMPA or NET-EN should be informed of the current uncertainty regarding whether use of these methods increases risk of HIV acquisition, and like all women at risk of HIV, should be empowered to access and use condoms and other HIV preventative measures. Programs, practitioners, and women urgently need guidance on how to maximize health with respect to avoiding both unintended pregnancy and HIV given inconclusive or limited data for certain HC methods., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Purpose: To estimate the prevalence of and factors associated with dual method use (i.e., condom with hormonal contraception or an intrauterine device) among adolescents and young women in the United States., Methods: We used 2006-2010 National Survey of Family Growth data from 2,093 unmarried females aged 15-24 years and at risk for unintended pregnancy. Using multivariable logistic regression, we estimated adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to assess the associations between dual method use at last sex and sociodemographic, behavioral, reproductive history, and sexual behavior factors., Results: At last sex, 20.7% of adolescents and young women used dual methods, 34.4% used condoms alone, 29.1% used hormonal contraception or an intrauterine device alone, and 15.8% used another method or no method. Factors associated with decreased odds of dual method use versus dual method nonuse included having a previous pregnancy (aOR = .44, 95% CI .27-.69), not having health insurance coverage over the past 12 months (aOR = .41, 95% CI .19-.91), and having sex prior to age 16 (aOR = .49, 95% CI .30-.78)., Conclusions: The prevalence of dual method use is low among adolescents and young women. Adolescents and young women who may have a higher risk of pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections (e.g., those with a previous pregnancy) were less likely to use dual methods at last sex. Interventions are needed to increase the correct and consistent use of dual methods among adolescents and young women who may be at greater risk for unintended pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Certain contraceptive methods may increase the risk of adverse events for women with certain medical conditions, including some women with diabetes, hyperlipidemia, liver disease, cervical cancer, sexually transmitted infections (STIs) or human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). This review was conducted to evaluate the evidence regarding health outcomes among women with and without laboratory testing to identify certain medical conditions prior to initiating contraceptives., Study Design: The PubMed database was searched from database inception through April 2012 for all peer-reviewed articles in any language evaluating health outcomes among women who initiated certain contraceptive methods and who had or had not received glucose, lipid, liver enzyme, cervical cytology, STI or HIV screening., Results: The systematic review did not identify any relevant direct evidence., Conclusions: While certain methods of hormonal contraception may not be safe for use by some women with diabetes, hyperlipidemia or liver disease, there is little value in screening for these conditions in asymptomatic women prior to initiation of contraceptive methods due to the low prevalence of these conditions among women of reproductive age. Although intrauterine devices (IUDs) and cervical caps should not be initiated in women with cervical cancer, the high rates of cervical screening and low incidence of cervical cancer in the United States make this scenario unlikely. Although some women at risk for, or infected with, STIs or HIV should not undergo IUD insertion, if women have been screened for STIs or HIV according to guidelines, additional screening at the time of IUD insertion is not warranted. Requiring unnecessary laboratory screening prior to initiation of contraceptive methods may impose barriers to contraceptive access, and efforts to remove such barriers are critical in reducing unintended pregnancy., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Provision of contraception is often linked with physical examination, including clinical breast examination (CBE) and pelvic examination. This review was conducted to evaluate the evidence regarding outcomes among women with and without physical examination prior to initiating hormonal contraceptives., Study Design: The PubMed database was searched from database inception through March 2012 for all peer-reviewed articles in any language concerning CBE and pelvic examination prior to initiating hormonal contraceptives. The quality of each study was assessed using the United States Preventive Services Task Force grading system., Results: The search did not identify any evidence regarding outcomes among women screened versus not screened with CBE prior to initiation of hormonal contraceptives. The search identified two case-control studies of fair quality which compared women who did or did not undergo pelvic examination prior to initiating oral contraceptives (OCs) or depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA). No differences in risk factors for cervical neoplasia, incidence of sexually transmitted infections, incidence of abnormal Pap smears or incidence of abnormal wet mount findings were observed., Conclusions: Although women with breast cancer should not use hormonal contraceptives, there is little utility in screening prior to initiation, due to the low incidence of breast cancer and uncertain value of CBE among women of reproductive age. Two fair quality studies demonstrated no differences between women who did or did not undergo pelvic examination prior to initiating OCs or DMPA with respect to risk factors or clinical outcomes. In addition, pelvic examination is not likely to detect any conditions for which hormonal contraceptives would be unsafe., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)