Real-world experience of women using extended-cycle vs monthly-cycle combined oral contraception in the United States: The National Health and Wellness Survey

15Citations
Citations of this article
126Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background: The real-world experience of women receiving extended-cycle combined oral contraception (COC) versus monthly-cycle COC has not been reported. Methods: Data were from the United States 2013 National Health and Wellness Survey. Eligible women (18-50 years old, premenopausal, without hysterectomy) currently using extended-cycle COC (3 months between periods) were compared with women using monthly-cycle COC. Treatment satisfaction (1 "extremely dissatisfied" to 7 "extremely satisfied"), adherence (8-item Morisky Medication Adherence Scale©), menstrual cycle-related symptoms, health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and health state utilities (Medical Outcomes Short Form Survey-36v2®), depression (9-item Patient Health Questionnaire), sleep difficulties, Work Productivity and Activity Impairment-General Health, and healthcare resource use were assessed using one-way analyses of variance, chi-square tests, and generalized linear models (adjusted for covariates). Results: Participants included 260 (6.7%) women using extended-cycle and 3616 (93.3%) using monthly-cycle COC. Women using extended-cycle COC reported significantly higher treatment satisfaction (P = 0.001) and adherence (P = 0.04) and reduced heavy menstrual bleeding (P = 0.029). A non-significant tendency toward reduced menstrual pain (39.5% versus 47.3%) and menstrual cycle-related symptoms (40.0% versus 48.7%) was found in women using extended-cycle versus monthly-cycle COC. Significantly more women using extended-cycle COC reported health-related diagnoses, indicating preferential prescription for extended-cycle COC among women reporting more health problems. Consistent with this poorer health, more women using extended-cycle COC reported fatigue, headache, and activity impairment (P values < 0.05). There were no other significant differences between groups. Conclusions: This real-world observational study supports extended-cycle COC as a valuable treatment option with high satisfaction, high adherence, and reduced heavy menstrual bleeding.

References Powered by Scopus

A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: Development and validation

40766Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

The PHQ-9: Validity of a brief depression severity measure

31622Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36

2500Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Anteceding factors predicting absenteeism and presenteeism in urban area in Malaysia

35Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

The myth of menstruation: How menstrual regulation and suppression impact contraceptive choice

19Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

What Women Want: Factors Impacting Contraceptive Satisfaction in Privately Insured Women

8Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Nappi, R. E., Lete, I., Lee, L. K., Flores, N. M., Micheletti, M. C., & Tang, B. (2018). Real-world experience of women using extended-cycle vs monthly-cycle combined oral contraception in the United States: The National Health and Wellness Survey. BMC Women’s Health, 18(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12905-017-0508-6

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 37

73%

Lecturer / Post doc 6

12%

Researcher 5

10%

Professor / Associate Prof. 3

6%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 25

50%

Nursing and Health Professions 14

28%

Psychology 6

12%

Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceut... 5

10%

Article Metrics

Tooltip
Mentions
Blog Mentions: 1
Social Media
Shares, Likes & Comments: 19

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free