Berenson A B, Wiemann C M
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston 77555-0587, USA.
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1995 Apr;172(4 Pt 1):1128-35; discussion 1135-7. doi: 10.1016/0002-9378(95)91471-4.
We compared continuation rates, effectiveness, satisfaction with method, side effects, and condom practices among adolescents using levonorgestrel implants (Norplant, Wyeth-Ayerst Laboratories, Philadelphia) as compared with oral contraceptives.
We conducted a case-control study comparing 94 adolescents < or = 18 years old who received Norplant between March 1, 1992, and Nov. 1, 1993 (cases), with 94 age-matched controls who selected oral contraceptives during this same time period. By use of a structured questionnaire, information was obtained on pregnancy status, duration of use, patient satisfaction, side effects, and condom practices 6 months after initiation. Objective measures included weight on Norplant and oral contraceptive users and hematocrit on implant patients.
Forty (43%) oral contraceptive patients compared with no Norplant patients discontinued their selected method before the 6-month interview (p = 0.00). Six patients prescribed oral contraceptives became pregnant. Ninety-three percent of Norplant users expressed overall satisfaction despite experiencing menstrual irregularity and cramping, amenorrhea, nervousness, abnormal hair growth or loss, rashes, and an increase in appetite more often than oral contraceptive users. Although Norplant patients also reported an increase in the duration of menstrual flow and number of days of spotting more often than oral contraceptive users, evaluation of hematocrits in these patients demonstrated a significant increase over the 6-month period (p = 0.00). Assessment of condom practices since initiation demonstrated that Norplant patients used condoms less often than oral contraceptive users (p = 0.00).
Use of levonorgestrel implants may cause more side effects than oral contraceptives in the early months after initiation but provide superior protection against unintended pregnancy. We concluded that Norplant is a reasonable alternative for adolescents, especially when compliance is an issue.
我们比较了使用左炔诺孕酮植入剂(Norplant,惠氏-艾尔斯特实验室,费城)的青少年与使用口服避孕药的青少年在续用率、有效性、对方法的满意度、副作用及避孕套使用情况等方面的差异。
我们进行了一项病例对照研究,比较了1992年3月1日至1993年11月1日期间接受Norplant的94名18岁及以下青少年(病例组)与同期选择口服避孕药的94名年龄匹配的对照组。通过使用结构化问卷,在开始使用6个月后获取了妊娠状况、使用时长、患者满意度、副作用及避孕套使用情况等信息。客观指标包括Norplant使用者和口服避孕药使用者的体重以及植入剂使用者的血细胞比容。
在6个月访谈前,40名(43%)口服避孕药患者停用了所选方法,而没有Norplant患者停药(p = 0.00)。6名开了口服避孕药的患者怀孕。93%的Norplant使用者总体表示满意,尽管他们比口服避孕药使用者更常出现月经不规律和痉挛、闭经、紧张、毛发异常生长或脱落、皮疹以及食欲增加等情况。尽管Norplant使用者也比口服避孕药使用者更常报告经期延长和点滴出血天数增加,但对这些患者血细胞比容的评估显示在6个月期间有显著升高(p = 0.00)。对开始使用后避孕套使用情况的评估表明,Norplant使用者使用避孕套的频率低于口服避孕药使用者(p = 0.00)。
在开始使用后的最初几个月,使用左炔诺孕酮植入剂可能比口服避孕药产生更多副作用,但在预防意外怀孕方面提供了更好的保护。我们得出结论,Norplant是青少年的一个合理选择,尤其是在依从性是一个问题的情况下。