Efficacy of medication abortion with concurrent initiation of progestin contraceptives: A retrospective cohort study.

Anna L Carroll, Anna M Strauss, Nicole M Philipps, Kyra D Kaczmarczik, Zahrah Shakur, Gerardo Ramirez, Tenley R Klc, Katelyn M Tessier, Christy M Boraas
{"title":"Efficacy of medication abortion with concurrent initiation of progestin contraceptives: A retrospective cohort study.","authors":"Anna L Carroll, Anna M Strauss, Nicole M Philipps, Kyra D Kaczmarczik, Zahrah Shakur, Gerardo Ramirez, Tenley R Klc, Katelyn M Tessier, Christy M Boraas","doi":"10.1016/j.contraception.2024.110536","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate medication abortion (MAB) outcomes for participants receiving intramuscular depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA) injections or subdermal etonogestrel implants concurrently with mifepristone compared to those who did not in a real-world setting.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>This retrospective cohort study included MAB patients from one Planned Parenthood health center in St. Paul, MN, between 2017 and 2019. We abstracted electronic health records and compared sociodemographic variables, clinical information, and treatment failure rates (primary outcome) between study groups with logistic regression (generating odds ratios [OR] and 95% confidence intervals [CI]).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 7296 MAB participants, 224 (3.1%) received DMPA injections and 309 (4.2%) received etonogestrel implants concurrently with mifepristone; 141 (62.9%) and 200 (64.7%) completed follow-up respectively. From a random sample of 1000, 990 comparison participants met inclusion criteria; 704 (71.1%) completed follow-up. Fourteen (9.9%) DMPA participants (aOR 4.26, 95% CI 1.87-9.68, p < 0.001) and 6 (3.0%) etonogestrel implant participants (aOR 1.38, 95% CI 0.48-3.55, p = 0.522) required additional treatment to empty the uterus and/or had an ongoing pregnancy, each contrasted with 15 (2.1%) comparison patients (models adjusted for gestational duration, patient age, parity, and race).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Although our study is limited by high rates of loss to follow-up, our analysis suggests that concurrent administration of DMPA with mifepristone may decrease MAB efficacy, while etonogestrel implant placement does not appear to alter MAB outcomes. These findings are overall consistent with prior literature and inform post-MAB contraception counseling.</p><p><strong>Implications: </strong>This retrospective cohort study reinforces prior randomized controlled trial findings that concurrent depot medroxyprogesterone acetate injection with mifepristone administration may decrease medication abortion efficacy. Conversely, concurrent etonogestrel contraceptive implant placement with mifepristone administration does not appear to decrease medication abortion efficacy. These findings inform post-abortion contraception counseling.</p>","PeriodicalId":93955,"journal":{"name":"Contraception","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contraception","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2024.110536","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To evaluate medication abortion (MAB) outcomes for participants receiving intramuscular depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA) injections or subdermal etonogestrel implants concurrently with mifepristone compared to those who did not in a real-world setting.

Study design: This retrospective cohort study included MAB patients from one Planned Parenthood health center in St. Paul, MN, between 2017 and 2019. We abstracted electronic health records and compared sociodemographic variables, clinical information, and treatment failure rates (primary outcome) between study groups with logistic regression (generating odds ratios [OR] and 95% confidence intervals [CI]).

Results: Among 7296 MAB participants, 224 (3.1%) received DMPA injections and 309 (4.2%) received etonogestrel implants concurrently with mifepristone; 141 (62.9%) and 200 (64.7%) completed follow-up respectively. From a random sample of 1000, 990 comparison participants met inclusion criteria; 704 (71.1%) completed follow-up. Fourteen (9.9%) DMPA participants (aOR 4.26, 95% CI 1.87-9.68, p < 0.001) and 6 (3.0%) etonogestrel implant participants (aOR 1.38, 95% CI 0.48-3.55, p = 0.522) required additional treatment to empty the uterus and/or had an ongoing pregnancy, each contrasted with 15 (2.1%) comparison patients (models adjusted for gestational duration, patient age, parity, and race).

Conclusion: Although our study is limited by high rates of loss to follow-up, our analysis suggests that concurrent administration of DMPA with mifepristone may decrease MAB efficacy, while etonogestrel implant placement does not appear to alter MAB outcomes. These findings are overall consistent with prior literature and inform post-MAB contraception counseling.

Implications: This retrospective cohort study reinforces prior randomized controlled trial findings that concurrent depot medroxyprogesterone acetate injection with mifepristone administration may decrease medication abortion efficacy. Conversely, concurrent etonogestrel contraceptive implant placement with mifepristone administration does not appear to decrease medication abortion efficacy. These findings inform post-abortion contraception counseling.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
同时使用孕激素避孕药进行药物流产的疗效:一项回顾性队列研究。
目的:评估肌肉注射醋酸甲羟孕酮(DMPA)或皮下注射依托诺孕酮(etonogestrel)同时接受药物流产(MAB)的参与者的效果:评估在真实世界环境中接受醋酸甲羟孕酮(DMPA)肌肉注射或皮下依托诺孕酮植入同时使用米非司酮的参与者与未使用米非司酮的参与者的药物流产(MAB)结果:这项回顾性队列研究纳入了 2017-2019 年间明尼苏达州圣保罗市一家计划生育保健中心的人流患者。我们摘录了电子健康记录,并通过逻辑回归(生成几率比[OR]和 95% 置信区间[CI])比较了研究组之间的社会人口学变量、临床信息和治疗失败率(主要结局):在 7296 名人与生物圈计划参与者中,224 人(3.1%)接受了 DMPA 注射,309 人(4.2%)在米非司酮注射的同时接受了依托孕烯植入;分别有 141 人(62.9%)和 200 人(64.7%)完成了随访。在随机抽取的 1000 名样本中,990 名对比参与者符合纳入标准;704 人(71.1%)完成了随访。14名(9.9%)DMPA参与者(aOR为4.26,95% CI为1.87-9.68,p结论:尽管我们的研究受到随访损失率高的限制,但我们的分析表明,同时使用 DMPA 和米非司酮可能会降低人流的疗效,而依托孕烯植入似乎不会改变人流的结果。这些发现总体上与之前的文献一致,可为人流后的避孕咨询提供参考:这项回顾性队列研究证实了之前的随机对照试验结果,即同时注射醋酸甲羟孕酮和米非司酮可能会降低药物流产的疗效。相反,在使用米非司酮的同时放置依托孕烯避孕植入物似乎不会降低药物流产的疗效。这些发现为人工流产后的避孕咨询提供了参考。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Economic analysis of foregoing Rh immunoglobulin for bleeding in pregnancy <12 weeks gestation. Modeling the impact of decreasing waiting period length for Medicaid sterilization: A multi-site cohort study. Ongoing contraceptive goals of patients who did not achieve desired postpartum permanent contraception prior to hospital discharge. The association of insertion methods on immediate postpartum intrauterine device expulsion rates: A retrospective cohort study. Society of Family Planning Research Practice Support: Strategies and considerations for addressing race and racism in quantitative family planning studies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1