Adolescent and young women's experience with the vaginal ring and oral contraceptive pills
- PMID: 18082856
- PMCID: PMC3163239
- DOI: 10.1016/j.jpag.2007.06.001
Adolescent and young women's experience with the vaginal ring and oral contraceptive pills
Abstract
Study objective: To compare acceptability of the vaginal contraceptive ring to that of oral contraceptive pills.
Design: Randomized, cross-over, 6-month study.
Setting: Urban family planning clinic for young low-income patients.
Participants: Sexually active females aged 15-21 years (n = 130).
Interventions: Participants were randomly assigned to use the vaginal ring or oral contraceptive pills for an initial study interval of three 28-day cycles, followed by three cycles of the alternate method.
Main outcome measures: Participants completed surveys about method use, acceptability, and side effects at baseline, after three cycles, and after six cycles. We analyzed study data using ANOVA models for cross-over designs.
Results: We did not detect higher compliance with the ring as compared to oral contraceptive pills (P = 0.176), although overall approval of the ring was significantly higher on several items measured, including liked using method (P = 0.015), would recommend it to friends (P = 0.012), and not as hard to remember to use method correctly (P < or = 0.000). Participants were less worried about health risks while using the ring (P = 0.006), but reported that the ring was more likely to interfere with sex than the pill (P < or = 0.001) and that sex partners liked the pill (P = 0.034). Most women did not report bothersome side effects with either method.
Conclusions: Adolescent and young women showed favorable acceptability of the vaginal contraceptive ring compared to oral contraceptive pills.
Similar articles
-
Comparative study on the efficacy, acceptability, and side effects of a contraceptive pill administered by the oral and the vaginal route: an international multicenter clinical trial.Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1993 Nov;54(5):540-5. doi: 10.1038/clpt.1993.186. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1993. PMID: 8222497 Clinical Trial.
-
Acceptability and satisfaction using Quick Start with the contraceptive vaginal ring versus an oral contraceptive.Contraception. 2006 May;73(5):488-92. doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2005.11.003. Epub 2006 Jan 3. Contraception. 2006. PMID: 16627032 Clinical Trial.
-
Comparison of combined hormonal vaginal ring and low dose combined oral hormonal pill for the treatment of idiopathic chronic pelvic pain: a randomised trial.Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2016 Dec;207:141-146. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2016.10.026. Epub 2016 Nov 8. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2016. PMID: 27863271 Clinical Trial.
-
Acceptability of an on-demand pericoital oral contraceptive pill: a systematic scoping review.Reprod Health. 2024 Jun 28;21(1):93. doi: 10.1186/s12978-024-01829-7. Reprod Health. 2024. PMID: 38943120 Free PMC article.
-
Practical problems which women encounter with available contraception in Australia.Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 1994 Jun;34(3):312-5. doi: 10.1111/j.1479-828x.1994.tb01080.x. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 1994. PMID: 7848207 Review.
Cited by
-
The Promise of Intravaginal Rings for Prevention: User Perceptions of Biomechanical Properties and Implications for Prevention Product Development.PLoS One. 2015 Dec 22;10(12):e0145642. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0145642. eCollection 2015. PLoS One. 2015. PMID: 26695431 Free PMC article.
-
Contraception for HIV-Infected Adolescents.Pediatrics. 2016 Sep;138(3):e20161892. doi: 10.1542/peds.2016-1892. Pediatrics. 2016. PMID: 27573084 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Non-adherence among women enrolled in a contraceptive vaginal ring use study in Kisumu, Kenya, 2014-2015.J Glob Health Rep. 2018;2:e2018032. doi: 10.29392/joghr.2.e2018032. J Glob Health Rep. 2018. PMID: 30976663 Free PMC article.
-
Hormonal and intrauterine methods for contraception for women aged 25 years and younger.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Aug 17;2015(8):CD009805. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009805.pub3. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015. PMID: 26280888 Free PMC article.
-
Participant experiences with a multipurpose vaginal ring for HIV and pregnancy prevention during a phase 1 clinical trial: learning from users to improve acceptability.Front Reprod Health. 2023 Jul 6;5:1147628. doi: 10.3389/frph.2023.1147628. eCollection 2023. Front Reprod Health. 2023. PMID: 37484873 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Berenson AB, Wiemann CM, Rickerr VI, et al. Contraceptive outcomes among adolescents prescribed Norplant implants versus oral contraceptives after one year of use. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1997;176:586. - PubMed
-
- Zibners A, Cromer BA, Hayes J. Comparison of continuation rates for hormonal contraception among adolescents. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 1999;12:90. - PubMed
-
- Alan Guttmacher Institute. Facts In Brief: Contraceptive Use. Alan Guttmacher Institute; 2005.
-
- Roumen FJ, Apter D, Mulders TM, et al. Efficacy, tolerability and acceptability of a novel contraceptive vaginal ring releasing etonogestrel and ethinyl oestradiol. Hum Reprod. 2001;16:469. - PubMed
-
- Veres S, Miller L, Burington B. A comparison between the vaginal ring and oral contraceptives. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;104:555. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
