Multicenter Comparison of the Contraceptive Ring and Patch
- 1 February 2008
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Obstetrics & Gynecology
- Vol. 111 (2), 267-277
- https://doi.org/10.1097/01.aog.0000298338.58511.d1
Abstract
To understand if the contraceptive ring or patch was more acceptable, as measured primarily by continuation, to women using an oral contraceptive and interested in a nondaily, combined hormonal contraceptive. Five hundred women were randomly assigned to use the contraceptive ring (n=249) or contraceptive patch (n=251) for four consecutive menstrual cycles, starting with their next menses. Participants returned for a single follow-up visit during the fourth cycle for an evaluation, which included a questionnaire to assess acceptability and adverse effects. Rates of completion of three cycles were 94.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 91.0-97.1%) and 88.2% (95% CI 83.4-92.0%) for ring and patch users, respectively (P=.03). Of these women, 71.0% (95% CI 64.8-76.6%) and 26.5% (95% CI 21.0-32.6%), respectively, planned to continue their method after the study (P<.001). Women switching to the patch were significantly more likely than women switching to the ring to experience longer periods (38% compared with 9%), increased dysmenorrhea (29% compared with 16%), frequent nausea (8% compared with 1%), frequent mood swings (14% compared with 8%), and frequent skin rash (12% compared with 2%) and were less likely to experience frequent vaginal discharge (8% compared with 17%). Ring users preferred the ring to the oral contraceptive (P<.001), and patch users preferred the oral contraceptive to the patch (P<.001). Nugent scores increased only in patch users (P=.01), although most of these women were asymptomatic. Women satisfied with combined oral contraceptives and interested in a nondaily method are more likely to continue using the contraceptive ring than the contraceptive patch. ClinicalTrials.gov, www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT00269620. I.Keywords
This publication has 17 references indexed in Scilit:
- Initiation of Oral Contraceptives Using a Quick Start Compared With a Conventional StartObstetrics & Gynecology, 2007
- Efficacy, acceptability and tolerability of the combined contraceptive ring, NuvaRing, compared with an oral contraceptive containing 30 μg of ethinyl estradiol and 3 mg of drospirenoneContraception, 2006
- Comparing Patient Telephone Callback Rates for Different Hormonal Birth Control Delivery SystemsClinical Journal of Sport Medicine, 2006
- The combined contraceptive vaginal ring (NuvaRing®): First experience in daily clinical practice in The NetherlandsThe European Journal of Contraception & Reproductive Health Care, 2006
- Same-day initiation of the transdermal hormonal delivery system (contraceptive patch) versus traditional initiation methodsContraception, 2005
- Efficacy and safety of a contraceptive vaginal ring (NuvaRing) compared with a combined oral contraceptive: a 1-year randomized trialContraception, 2005
- A Comparison Between the Vaginal Ring and Oral ContraceptivesObstetrics & Gynecology, 2004
- Contraceptive failure in the United StatesContraception, 2004
- Efficacy, cycle control, and user acceptability of a novel combined contraceptive vaginal ringObstetrics & Gynecology, 2002
- The effect on intrauterine device position and performance of a modified TCu380A insertion techniqueThe European Journal of Contraception & Reproductive Health Care, 2002