Use of Norplant contraceptive implants in the immediate postpartum period: safety and tolerance
- PMID: 7847530
- DOI: 10.1016/0002-9378(95)90109-4
Use of Norplant contraceptive implants in the immediate postpartum period: safety and tolerance
Abstract
Objective: Our purpose was to determine the safety and tolerance of levonorgestrel contraceptive implants (Norplant, Wyeth-Ayerst, Philadelphia) when inserted immediately post partum, to document the effects on weight and blood pressure, and to determine the side effects.
Study design: After vaginal delivery, 250 women were randomized to receive Norplant within 48 hours of delivery (study group) or at the 4- to 6-week postpartum visit (control group). Baseline measurements were recorded and compared with those obtained at the 4- to 6-week follow-up visit. A diary was maintained by patients who recorded bleeding and side effects. Statistical analysis was performed with t test and chi 2 analysis.
Results: There were no episodes of acute postpartum hemorrhage or clinically significant bleeding. Compared with the control group, the immediate group reported significantly more bleeding days (p < 0.01). There was no significant difference between the two groups in the hemoglobin values obtained at 4 to 6 weeks post partum. The immediate insertion group reported significantly more headaches (p < 0.01) and acne (p = 0.01).
Conclusion: Norplant is well tolerated and should be available for interested patients immediately post partum.
PIP: During June 1992-February 1993, physicians in Charlotte, North Carolina, randomly assigned 250 women who had delivered vaginally at the Carolinas Medical Center to receive the contraceptive implant Norplant either before being discharged from the hospital on postpartum day 1, 2, or 3 or 4-6 weeks later at the scheduled postpartum follow-up visit. They wanted to ascertain whether insertion of Norplant in the immediate postpartum period was safe and well-tolerated. 26 women were lost to follow-up. 11 of these women were in the delayed insertion group, so they did not receive Norplant or an alternative contraceptive method, placing them at risk of pregnancy. Another 34 women in the same group returned for their follow-up visit but did not receive Norplant. The mean interval from delivery to insertion stood at 1.7 days for the immediate insertion group and 34.3 days for the delayed insertion group. No one in either group experienced acute postpartum hemorrhage. The immediate insertion group had much more bleeding and spotting than did the delayed insertion group (17 vs. 13.6 days, p 0.01, and 11.1 vs. 8.8 days, p = 0.03, respectively; 28.2 vs. 22.4 days for both spotting and bleeding, p 0.01). Since hemoglobin values of the two groups did not differ (12.9 vs. 12.7), the increased bleeding was not clinically significant. Women in the immediate insertion group were more likely than those in the delayed insertion group to have headaches on at least seven days between insertion and study follow-up (15.1% vs. 2.8%; p 0.01). They also were more likely to have acne during at least three days (18.9% vs. 6.4%; p 0.01). They were just as likely as the delayed insertion group to report nausea, hair loss, and hirsutism. 40% of the women in both groups had sexual intercourse before their 4-6 week follow-up visit. These findings show that Norplant can be safe and well-tolerated if inserted in the immediate postpartum period.
Similar articles
-
Immediate postpartum insertion of the norplant contraceptive device.Fertil Steril. 1996 Jul;66(1):43-8. Fertil Steril. 1996. PMID: 8752609
-
Preliminary experience with Norplant in an inner city population.Contraception. 1993 Feb;47(2):193-203. doi: 10.1016/0010-7824(93)90091-k. Contraception. 1993. PMID: 8449019
-
Assessing the acceptability of Norplant contraceptive in four patient populations.Contraception. 1995 Jul;52(1):45-9. doi: 10.1016/0010-7824(95)00123-r. Contraception. 1995. PMID: 8521714
-
Subdermal contraceptive implants in nurse-midwifery practice.J Nurse Midwifery. 1993 Mar-Apr;38(2 Suppl):80S-87S. doi: 10.1016/0091-2182(93)90100-u. J Nurse Midwifery. 1993. PMID: 8483013 Review.
-
Education and counseling for Norplant users.J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 1994 Jun;23(5):387-91. doi: 10.1111/j.1552-6909.1994.tb01895.x. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 1994. PMID: 8083779 Review.
Cited by
-
Cost-Effectiveness of Immediate Compared With Delayed Postpartum Etonogestrel Implant Insertion.Obstet Gynecol. 2015 Jul;126(1):47-55. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000000907. Obstet Gynecol. 2015. PMID: 26241255 Free PMC article.
-
Use of contraceptive implants at 12 months in women who intended to undergo immediate versus delayed postpartum insertion following high-risk pregnancy.Obstet Gynecol Sci. 2023 May;66(3):241-251. doi: 10.5468/ogs.22280. Epub 2023 Apr 14. Obstet Gynecol Sci. 2023. PMID: 37062533 Free PMC article.
-
Immediate versus delayed postpartum insertion of contraceptive implant for contraception.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Apr 22;4(4):CD011913. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011913.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017. Update in: Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Oct 27;10:CD011913. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011913.pub3. PMID: 28432791 Free PMC article. Updated.
-
Levonorgestrel subdermal implants. A review of contraceptive efficacy and acceptability.Drugs. 1998 Jun;55(6):861-87. doi: 10.2165/00003495-199855060-00019. Drugs. 1998. PMID: 9617600 Review.
-
Levonorgestrel subdermal implants. Contraception on trial.Drug Saf. 1997 Dec;17(6):360-8. doi: 10.2165/00002018-199717060-00002. Drug Saf. 1997. PMID: 9429835 Review.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical