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

Author:

MacGregor E AnneORCID,Guillebaud John

Abstract

AimThis 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 – and provides recommendations for practice.MethodsRelevant 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.ResultsThere is considerable inter- and 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.ConclusionsThere 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.

Publisher

BMJ

Subject

Obstetrics and Gynaecology,Reproductive Medicine

Reference50 articles.

1. Fertility control with oral medication;Pincus;Am J Obstet Gynecol,1958

2. 20 microg versus >20 microg estrogen combined oral contraceptives for contraception;Gallo;Cochrane Database Syst Rev,2013

3. Trussell J . Contraceptive efficacy. In: Hatcher R , Trussell J , Nelson A , eds. Contraceptive technology. 20th edn. New York: Ardent Media, 2011.

4. Continuous or extended cycle vs. cyclic use of combined hormonal contraceptives for contraception;Edelman;Cochrane Database Syst Rev,2014

5. Comparative study on intermittent versus continuous use of a contraceptive pill administered by vaginal route;Coutinho;Contraception,1995

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3