The 7-day contraceptive hormone-free interval should be consigned to history

15Citations
Citations of this article
32Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Aim This review summarises the available data on the disadvantages of the 7-day contraceptive-free interval (CFI) of combined oral contraceptives (COCs), in contrast to shorter CFIs or continuous use-including flexible regimens- A nd provides recommendations for practice. Methods Relevant papers were identified by Medline and PubMed. The final reference list was generated on the basis of relevance to the review, with priority given to systematic reviews and randomised controlled trials. Results There is considerable inter- A nd intra-individual variation in the absorption and metabolism of COCs. Even with perfect use, the loss of endocrine suppression during the standard 7-day CFI allows follicular development with the risk of escape ovulation in a vulnerable minority. This risk increases in typical users whenever the CFI is prolonged: Late restarts are a common reason for pill omissions. Shortening or eliminating the CFI improves contraceptive efficacy using the lowest doses available, without evidence to date of compromised safety. Conclusions There is no scientific evidence to support a 7-day CFI and it should be replaced either by a continuous flexible regimen, or extended regimens with a shortened CFI, prescribed first-line. In women preferring a monthly 'bleed', a 4-day CFI similarly provides a greater safety margin when pills are omitted .

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

MacGregor, E. A., & Guillebaud, J. (2018, July 1). The 7-day contraceptive hormone-free interval should be consigned to history. BMJ Sexual and Reproductive Health. BMJ Publishing Group. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjsrh-2017-200036

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free