User satisfaction with an intrauterine system containing 52 mg levonorgestrel: a Portuguese study

References

• Teal SB, Turok DK, Chen BA, et al. Five-year contraceptive efficacy and safety of a levonorgestrel 52-mg intrauterine system. Obstet Gynecol. 2019;133(1):63–70.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• INFARMED. Summary of product characteristics Levosert(r). 2018. INFARMED, the national authority. Available from: https://extranet.infarmed.pt/INFOMED-fo/detalhes-medicamento.xhtml
   Google Scholar
• Grandi G, Farulla A, Sileo FG, et al. Levonorgestrel-releasing intra-uterine systems as female contraceptives. Expert Opin Pharmacother. 2018;19(7):677–686.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mawet M, Nollevaux F, Nizet D, et al. Impact of a new levonorgestrel intrauterine system, Levosert®, on heavy menstrual bleeding: results of a one-year randomised controlled trial. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2014;19(3):169–179.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Römer T, Linsberger D. User satisfaction with a levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS): data from an international survey. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2009;14(6):391–398.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carvalho NM, Chou V, Modesto W, et al. Relationship between user satisfaction with the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system and bleeding patterns. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2017;43(11):1732–1737.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laporte M, Charles CM, Metelus S, et al. Reasons for satisfaction with the use of the 52-mg levonorgestrel intrauterine system. Intl J Gynecology & Obste. 2022;159(2):577–582.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhao S, Deng J, Wang Y, et al. Experience and levels of satisfaction with the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system in China: a prospective multicenter survey. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2014;8:1449–1455.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peipert JF, Zhao Q, Allsworth JE, et al. Continuation and satisfaction of reversible contraception. Obstet Gynecol. 2011;117(5):1105–1113.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hall AM, Kutler BA. Intrauterine contraception in nulliparous women: a prospective survey. J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care. 2016;42(1):36–42.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gemzell-Danielsson K, Apter D, Hauck B, et al. The effect of age, parity and body mass index on the efficacy, safety, placement and user satisfaction associated with two low-dose levonorgestrel intrauterine contraceptive systems: subgroup analyses of data From a phase III trial. PLoS One. 2015;10(9):e0135309.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Costescu D, Chawla R, Hughes R, et al. Discontinuation rates of intrauterine contraception due to unfavourable bleeding: a systematic review. BMC Womens Health. 2022;22:82.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Modesto W, Bahamondes MV, Bahamondes L. A randomized clinical trial of the effect of intensive versus non-intensive counselling on discontinuation rates due to bleeding disturbances of three long-acting reversible contraceptives. Hum Reprod. 2014;29(7):1393–1399.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ribeiro R, Chaves A, Fernandes L, et al. Evaluation of gynecologist’s and patient’s experience, anxiety and pain perception during intrauterine device insertion containing levonorgestrel ELA 52 study. J Gynecol Reprod Med. 2021;5:181–186.
   Google Scholar
• Akers AY, Harding J, Perriera LK, et al. Satisfaction with the intrauterine device insertion procedure among adolescent and young adult women. Obstet Gynecol. 2018;131(6):1130–1136.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Radesic B, Sharma A. Levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system for treating menstrual disorders: a patient satisfaction questionnaire. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2004;44(3):247–251.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robinson R, China S, Bunkheila A, et al. Mirena® intrauterine system in the treatment of menstrual disorders: a survey of UK patients’ experience, acceptability and satisfaction. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2008;28(7):728–731.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bastianelli C, Farris M, Rosato E, et al. The use of different doses levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS): real-world data from a multicenter Italian study. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2022;27(1):16–22.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Darney PD, Stuart GS, Thomas MA, et al. Amenorrhea rates and predictors during 1 year of levonorgestrel 52 mg intrauterine system use. Contraception. 2018;97(3):210–214.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sergison JE, Maldonado LY, Gao X, et al. Levonorgestrel intrauterine system associated amenorrhea: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019;220(5):440–448.e8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schreiber CA, Teal SB, Blumenthal PD, et al. Bleeding patterns for the Liletta® levonorgestrel 52 mg intrauterine system. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2018;23(2):116–120.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kitawaki J, Akira S, Harada T, et al. Bleeding patterns of women with heavy menstrual bleeding or dysmenorrhoea using the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system: results from a real-world observational study in Japan (J-MIRAI). Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2022;27(4):300–307.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zimmermann Y, Viviano M, Yaron M. Swiss gynecologists opinions and perceptions concerning the use of intrauterine devices by nulliparous and multiparous women: an online survey study. IJWH. 2019;11:153–159.
   Google Scholar
• Zgliczynska M, Kocaj K, Szymusik I, et al. Levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system as a contraceptive method in nulliparous women: a systematic review. JCM. 2020;9(7):2101–2114.
   Google Scholar
• Wong RC, Bell RJ, Thunuguntla K, et al. Implanon users are less likely to be satisfied with their contraception after 6 months than IUD users. Contraception. 2009;80(5):452–456.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar