113
Views
0
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Clinical Study

Femiject, a once-a-month combined injectable contraceptive: experience from Pakistan

, , &
Pages 359-364 | Received 08 Feb 2020, Accepted 18 Jul 2020, Published online: 06 Aug 2020
 

Abstract

Objectives

The aims of the study were to compare the 12 month continuation rate, level of satisfaction and bleeding patterns of a once-a-month combined injectable contraceptive (CIC; Femiject), a 3 monthly progestogen-only injectable contraceptive (depot medroxyprogesterone acetate [DMPA]) and combined oral contraceptives (COCs).

Methods

A prospective observational study was conducted at Aziz Medical Centre, Karachi, Pakistan. The study comprised 171 married women aged 19–35 years and requesting contraception. Participants were offered injectable contraceptives or COCs and evaluated twice: once at the beginning of the study and again after 12 months, or earlier if they discontinued use.

Results

Sixty (35.1%) women chose COCs, 53 (31.0%) chose DMPA and 58 (33.9%) chose the CIC. The continuation rate was higher among CIC users (p = .034). CIC users were more satisfied with their method compared with those who chose COCs or DMPA (63.8% vs 25.0% and 28.3%, respectively). Most CIC users said they were likely or very likely to use the method again (63.8%); only 25.9% said they would not recommend it to a friend. CIC users had, however, more spotting compared with COC users (60.3% vs 3.3%; p ˂ .001).

Conclusion

As the continuation rate, level of satisfaction and bleeding profile of CIC users was promising, increased uptake should be encouraged. Our study shows that CIC is a good option for women requesting contraception.

摘要:

目的:本研究的目的是对3种避孕药12个月续用率、满意度和出血模式的比较:每月使用的复方长效避孕针剂(CIC;femijet)、每3个月使用的单纯孕激素避孕针剂(depot medroxyprogesterone acetate, DMPA)和复方口服避孕药(COCs)。

方法:本研究是来自巴基斯坦卡拉奇的阿齐兹医疗中心的一项前瞻性的研究。这项研究包括171名年龄在19-35岁之间有避孕需求的已婚妇女。提供给参与者注射或者口服避孕药, 并对她们进行两次评估:一次是在研究开始时, 另一次是在使用12个月后, 如果他们停止使用, 则将评估时间提前。

结果:60名(35.1%)女性选择了COCs, 53名(31.0%)选择了DMPA, 58名(33.9%)选择了CIC。CIC使用者的续用率较高(p=0.034)。选择CIC的女性对其使用方法更满意, 与选择COCs或DMPA的女性相比(分别为63.8%和25.0%和28.3%)。大多数使用CIC的女性表示, 她们很可能或非常有可能再次使用这种方法(63.8%);只有25.9%的女性表示不会向朋友推荐这种方法。然而, CIC使用者出血率比COC女性要高(60.3%比3.3%;p˂.001)。

结论:由于CIC使用者的持续使用率、满意度和出血模式都比较好, 应鼓励更多的女性使用。我们的研究表明, 对于有避孕需求的女性来说, CIC是一个很好的选择。

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Log in via your institution

Log in to Taylor & Francis Online

PDF download + Online access

  • 48 hours access to article PDF & online version
  • Article PDF can be downloaded
  • Article PDF can be printed
USD 65.00 Add to cart

Issue Purchase

  • 30 days online access to complete issue
  • Article PDFs can be downloaded
  • Article PDFs can be printed
USD 416.00 Add to cart

* Local tax will be added as applicable

Related Research

People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.

Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.

Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.