• Cochrane Db Syst Rev · Jul 2006

    Review

    Depot medroxyprogesterone versus norethisterone oenanthate for long-acting progestogenic contraception.

    • B H Draper, C Morroni, M Hoffman, J Smit, M Beksinska, J Hapgood, and L Van der Merwe.
    • University of Cape Town, Public Health and Family Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, Anzio Road, Observatory, Cape Town, South Africa 7925. bevdraper@iafrica.com
    • Cochrane Db Syst Rev. 2006 Jul 19; 2006 (3): CD005214CD005214.

    BackgroundThere are two injectable progestogen-only contraceptives (IPCs) that have been available in many countries in the world since 1983. They are both still extensively used in many developing countries, forming a large proportion of the health system's expenditure on contraception. These are depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA) and norethisterone oenanthate (NET-EN). These are both highly effective contraceptives that receive wide acceptance amongst women in their fertile years. They differ in frequency of administration that has implications on patient uptake. They also differ in cost that may significantly affect budgeting in the health system. A systematic comparison will aid to ensure their rational use.ObjectivesTo determine if there are differences between depot medroxyprogesterone acetate given at a dose of 150 mg IM every 3 months and norethisterone oenanthate given at a dose of 200mg IM every 2 months, in terms of contraceptive effectiveness, reversibility and discontinuation patterns, minor effects and major effects.Search StrategyWe searched the computerized databases MEDLINE using PubMed, Popline, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, Biblioline, LILACS, EMBASE and PASCAL for randomised controlled trials of DMPA versus NET-EN for long-acting progestogenic contraception. Studies were included regardless of language, and all databases were reviewed from the time that injectable progestogens have been in use.Selection CriteriaAll randomised controlled comparisons of DMPA acetate given at a dose of 150 mg IM every 3 months versus NET-EN given at a dose of 200mg IM every 2 months, used for contraception, were included. Trials had to report on contraceptive efficiency and return to fertility, discontinuation risks and reasons for discontinuation, and clinical effects, both menstrual and non-menstrual.Data Collection And AnalysisBD and CM evaluated the titles and abstracts obtained through applying the search strategy and applied the eligibility criteria. BD attempted to contact authors where clarification of the data was required, and contacted all main manufacturers of the contraceptives. After inclusion of the two studies, the data was abstracted and analysed with RevMan 4.2.Main ResultsTwo trials were included in this review. There was no significant difference between the two treatment groups for the frequency of discontinuation for either contraceptive, although the women on NET-EN were 4% more likely to discontinue for personal reasons than those on DPMA. Discontinuation because of accidental pregnancy did not differ between the groups. Although the duration of bleeding and spotting events was the same in each group, women on DPMA were 21% more likely to develop amenorrhoea. Mean changes in body weight at 12 and 24 months, and in systolic and diastolic blood pressure at 12 months did not differ significantly between the studies.Authors' ConclusionsWhile the choice between DPMA and NET-EN as injectable progestogen contraceptives may vary between both health providers and patients, data from randomized controlled trials indicate little difference between the effects of these methods, except that women on DMPA are more likely to develop amenorrhoea. There is inadequate data to detect differences in some non-menstrual major and minor clinical effects.

      Pubmed     Free full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

Want more great medical articles?

Keep up to date with a free trial of metajournal, personalized for your practice.
1,704,841 articles already indexed!

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.