-
The Journal of Sexual Medicine Dec 2022Besides experiencing vasomotor symptoms, after surgical menopause and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO), women experience moderate to severe psychological and sexual... (Review)
Review
Surgical Menopause and Bilateral Oophorectomy: Effect of Estrogen-Progesterone and Testosterone Replacement Therapy on Psychological Well-being and Sexual Functioning; A Systematic Literature Review.
BACKGROUND
Besides experiencing vasomotor symptoms, after surgical menopause and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO), women experience moderate to severe psychological and sexual symptoms.
AIMS
To systematically review and meta-analyze the effect of systemic hormone replacement therapy (sHRT) on psychological well-being and sexual functioning in women after surgical menopause and BSO.
METHODS
Medline/Pubmed, EMBASE and PsychInfo were systematically searched until November 2021. Randomized controlled trials investigating the effect of sHRT on psychological well-being and/or sexual functioning in surgically menopausal women and women after BSO were eligible for inclusion. Two independent authors performed study selection, risk of bias assessment and data extraction. Standardized mean differences (SMDs) were calculated.
OUTCOMES
Primary outcomes for psychological well-being were defined as overall psychological well-being, depression, and anxiety. Primary outcomes for sexual functioning were defined as overall sexual functioning, sexual desire, and sexual satisfaction. All outcomes were assessed on short (≤12 weeks) or medium term (13-26 weeks).
RESULTS
Twelve studies were included. Estradiol had a beneficial effect on depressed mood on short term 3-6 years after surgery or 2 years (median) after surgery with high heterogeneity (SMD: -1.37, 95%CI: -2.38 to -0.37, P = .007, I 79%). Testosterone had a beneficial effect on overall sexual functioning on short to medium term 4.6 years (mean) after surgery (SMD 0.38, 95%CI 0.11-0.65, I 0%) and on sexual desire on medium term at least 3-12 months after surgery (SMD 0.38, 95%CI 0.19-0.56, I 54%). For most studies, risk of bias was uncertain.
CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS
Estradiol may beneficially affect psychological symptoms after surgical menopause or BSO and testosterone might improve sexual desire and overall sexual functioning.
STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS
This review only included patient-reported outcomes, thereby reflected perceived and not simply objective symptoms in surgically menopausal women and women after BSO. The small number of studies highly varied in nature and bias could not be excluded, therefore our results should be interpreted with great caution.
CONCLUSION
Independent randomized controlled clinical trials investigating the effects of estrogen-progesterone and testosterone on psychological and sexual symptoms after surgical menopause are needed.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42019136698. Stuursma A, Lanjouw L, Idema DL, et al. Surgical Menopause and Bilateral Oophorectomy: Effect of Estrogen-Progesterone and Testosterone Replacement Therapy on Psychological Well-being and Sexual Functioning: A Systematic Literature Review. J Sex Med 2022;19:1778-1789.
Topics: Humans; Female; Progesterone; Quality of Life; Hormone Replacement Therapy; Menopause; Ovariectomy; Estrogens; Testosterone; Estradiol
PubMed: 36175351
DOI: 10.1016/j.jsxm.2022.08.191 -
Frontiers in Endocrinology 2022The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to update the current evidence for the efficacy and safety of progesterone luteal phase support (LPS) following... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
UNLABELLED
The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to update the current evidence for the efficacy and safety of progesterone luteal phase support (LPS) following ovarian stimulation and intrauterine insemination treatment (OS-IUI) for unexplained or mild male infertility. Four additional studies were identified compared to the previous review in 2017. Twelve RCTs (2631 patients, 3262 cycles) met full inclusion criteria. Results from quantitative synthesis suggest that progesterone LPS after OS-IUI leads to higher live birth (RR 1.38, 95%CI [1.09, 1.74]; 7 RCTs, n=1748) and clinical pregnancy rates (RR 1.38, 95% CI [1.21, 1.59]; 11 RCTs, n=2163) than no LPS or placebo. This effect is specifically present in protocols using gonadotropins for OS-IUI (RR 1.41, 95%CI [1.17, 1.71]; 7 RCTs, n=1114), and unclear in protocols involving clomiphene citrate (RR 1.01, 95% CI [0.05, 18.94]; 2 RCTs, n=138). We found no effect of progesterone LPS on multiple pregnancy or miscarriage rates. No correlation between drug-dosage or duration of treatment and effect size was seen. Though our results suggest both benefit and safety of progesterone LPS in OS-IUI, evidence is of low to moderate quality and additional well-powered trials are still mandatory to confirm our findings and justify implementation in daily practice.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=292325, identifier CRD42021292325.
Topics: Clomiphene; Female; Gonadotropins; Humans; Insemination, Artificial; Luteal Phase; Male; Ovulation Induction; Pregnancy; Progesterone
PubMed: 36120470
DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2022.960393 -
Frontiers in Endocrinology 2022To investigate the risk of preterm birth in women with a placenta previa or a low-lying placenta for different cut-offs of gestational age and to evaluate preventive... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To investigate the risk of preterm birth in women with a placenta previa or a low-lying placenta for different cut-offs of gestational age and to evaluate preventive interventions.
SEARCH AND METHODS
MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, Web of Science, WHO-ICTRP and clinicaltrials.gov were searched until December 2021. Randomized controlled trials, cohort studies and case-control studies assessing preterm birth in women with placenta previa or low-lying placenta with a placental edge within 2 cm of the internal os in the second or third trimester were eligible for inclusion. Pooled proportions and odds ratios for the risk of preterm birth before 37, 34, 32 and 28 weeks of gestation were calculated. Additionally, the results of the evaluation of preventive interventions for preterm birth in these women are described.
RESULTS
In total, 34 studies were included, 24 reporting on preterm birth and 9 on preventive interventions. The pooled proportions were 46% (95% CI [39 - 53%]), 17% (95% CI [11 - 25%]), 10% (95% CI [7 - 13%]) and 2% (95% CI [1 - 3%]), regarding preterm birth <37, <34, <32 and <28 weeks in women with placenta previa. For low-lying placentas the risk of preterm birth was 30% (95% CI [19 - 43%]) and 1% (95% CI [0 - 6%]) before 37 and 34 weeks, respectively. Women with a placenta previa were more likely to have a preterm birth compared to women with a low-lying placenta or women without a placenta previa for all gestational ages. The studies about preventive interventions all showed potential prolongation of pregnancy with the use of intramuscular progesterone, intramuscular progesterone + cerclage or pessary.
CONCLUSIONS
Both women with a placenta previa and a low-lying placenta have an increased risk of preterm birth. This increased risk is consistent across all severities of preterm birth between 28-37 weeks of gestation. Women with placenta previa have a higher risk of preterm birth than women with a low-lying placenta have. Cervical cerclage, pessary and intramuscular progesterone all might have benefit for both women with placenta previa and low-lying placenta, but data in this population are lacking and inconsistent, so that solid conclusions about their effectiveness cannot be drawn.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42019123675.
Topics: Cervix Uteri; Female; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Placenta; Placenta Previa; Pregnancy; Premature Birth; Progesterone
PubMed: 36120450
DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2022.921220 -
Advances in Therapy Nov 2022Although several studies suggest beneficial effects of low-dose estrogen-progestins (LEPs) and progestins on dysmenorrhea in Japanese women, the difference in efficacy... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
INTRODUCTION
Although several studies suggest beneficial effects of low-dose estrogen-progestins (LEPs) and progestins on dysmenorrhea in Japanese women, the difference in efficacy between drugs remains unknown.
METHODS
We identified studies by searching the MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and ICHUSHI databases and included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that used total dysmenorrhea score and visual analogue scale (VAS) as outcome measures to evaluate LEPs and progestins for primary and secondary dysmenorrhea. We analyzed results by meta-analysis and network meta-analysis (NMA).
RESULTS
We identified 10 articles on eight RCTs and included seven drugs (six LEPs and one progestin, i.e., dienogest) and placebo in the analysis. Meta-analysis showed improvements in total dysmenorrhea score and VAS for almost all drugs compared with placebo. In NMA, VAS in secondary dysmenorrhea improved more with dienogest than with norethisterone/ethinylestradiol (mean difference - 25.84 [95% CrI - 44.46 to - 7.15]). In the comparison of administration regimens, VAS improved more with progestin-continuous than LEP-cyclic and the surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) of LEP-extended and progestin-continuous appeared to be higher than that of LEP-cyclic.
CONCLUSIONS
We confirmed that LEPs and dienogest are effective for primary and secondary dysmenorrhea and suggest that continuous regimens may be more effective than cyclic regimens in improving outcomes.
Topics: Dysmenorrhea; Estrogens; Female; Gastrointestinal Diseases; Humans; Japan; Network Meta-Analysis; Norethindrone; Progestins
PubMed: 36048405
DOI: 10.1007/s12325-022-02298-9 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2022Ovulation induction may impact endometrial receptivity due to insufficient progesterone secretion. Low progesterone is associated with poor pregnancy outcomes. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Ovulation induction may impact endometrial receptivity due to insufficient progesterone secretion. Low progesterone is associated with poor pregnancy outcomes.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness and safety of luteal phase support (LPS) in infertile women trying to conceive by intrauterine insemination or by sexual intercourse.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, LILACS, trial registries for ongoing trials, and reference lists of articles (from inception to 25 August 2021).
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of LPS using progestogen, human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG), or gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist supplementation in IUI or natural cycle.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Our primary outcomes were live birth rate/ongoing pregnancy rate (LBR/OPR) and miscarriage. MAIN RESULTS: We included 25 RCTs (5111 participants). Most studies were at unclear or high risk of bias. We graded the certainty of evidence as very low to low. The main limitations of the evidence were poor reporting and imprecision. 1. Progesterone supplement versus placebo or no treatment We are uncertain if vaginal progesterone increases LBR/OPR (risk ratio (RR) 1.10, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81 to 1.48; 7 RCTs; 1792 participants; low-certainty evidence) or decreases miscarriage per pregnancy compared to placebo or no treatment (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.25; 5 RCTs; 261 participants). There were no data on LBR or miscarriage with oral stimulation. We are uncertain if progesterone increases LBR/OPR in women with gonadotropin stimulation (RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.92; 4 RCTs; 1054 participants; low-certainty evidence) and oral stimulation (clomiphene citrate or letrozole) (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.64; 2 RCTs; 485 participants; low-certainty evidence). One study reported on OPR in women with gonadotropin plus oral stimulation; the evidence from this study was uncertain (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.42; 1 RCT; 253 participants; low-certainty evidence). Given the low certainty of the evidence, it is unclear if progesterone reduces miscarriage per clinical pregnancy in any stimulation protocol (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.91; 2 RCTs; 102 participants, with gonadotropin; RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.50; 2 RCTs; 123 participants, with gonadotropin plus oral stimulation; and RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.25 to 1.14; 2 RCTs; 119 participants, with oral stimulation). Low-certainty evidence suggests that progesterone in all types of ovarian stimulation may increase clinical pregnancy compared to placebo (RR 1.38, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.74; 7 RCTs; 1437 participants, with gonadotropin; RR 1.40, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.90; 4 RCTs; 733 participants, with gonadotropin plus oral stimulation (clomiphene citrate or letrozole); and RR 1.44, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.98; 6 RCTs; 1073 participants, with oral stimulation). 2. Progesterone supplementation regimen We are uncertain if there is any difference between 300 mg and 600 mg of vaginal progesterone for OPR and multiple pregnancy (RR 1.58, 95% CI 0.81 to 3.09; 1 RCT; 200 participants; very low-certainty evidence; and RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.05 to 5.43; 1 RCT; 200 participants, very low-certainty evidence, respectively). No other outcomes were reported for this comparison. There were three different comparisons between progesterone regimens. For OPR, the evidence is very uncertain for intramuscular (IM) versus vaginal progesterone (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.02; 1 RCT; 225 participants; very low-certainty evidence); we are uncertain if there is any difference between oral and vaginal progesterone (RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.70 to 2.22; 1 RCT; 150 participants; very low-certainty evidence) or between subcutaneous and vaginal progesterone (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.54 to 2.05; 1 RCT; 246 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain if IM or oral progesterone reduces miscarriage per clinical pregnancy compared to vaginal progesterone (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.32; 1 RCT; 81 participants and RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.11 to 3.09; 1 RCT; 41 participants, respectively). Clinical pregnancy and multiple pregnancy were reported for all comparisons; the evidence for these outcomes was very uncertain. Only one RCT reported adverse effects. We are uncertain if IM route increases the risk of adverse effects when compared with the vaginal route (RR 9.25, 95% CI 2.21 to 38.78; 1 RCT; 225 participants; very low-certainty evidence). 3. GnRH agonist versus placebo or no treatment No trials reported live birth. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of GnRH agonist in ongoing pregnancy (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.74; 1 RCT; 291 participants, very low-certainty evidence), miscarriage per clinical pregnancy (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.26 to 2.10; 2 RCTs; 79 participants, very low-certainty evidence) and clinical pregnancy (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.47; 2 RCTs; 340 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and multiple pregnancy (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.70; 2 RCTs; 126 participants). 4. GnRH agonist versus vaginal progesterone The evidence for the effect of GnRH agonist injection on clinical pregnancy is very uncertain (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.95; 1 RCT; 242 participants). 5. HCG injection versus no treatment The evidence for the effect of hCG injection on clinical pregnancy (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.40 to 2.13; 1 RCT; 130 participants) and multiple pregnancy rates (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.22 to 4.92; 1 RCT; 130 participants) is very uncertain. 6. Luteal support in natural cycle No study evaluated the effect of LPS in natural cycle. We could not perform sensitivity analyses, as there were no studies at low risk of selection bias and not at high risk in other domains.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We are uncertain if vaginal progesterone supplementation during luteal phase is associated with a higher live birth/ongoing pregnancy rate. Vaginal progesterone may increase clinical pregnancy rate; however, its effect on miscarriage rate and multiple pregnancy rate is uncertain. We are uncertain if IM progesterone improves ongoing pregnancy rates or decreases miscarriage rate when compared to vaginal progesterone. Regarding the other reported comparisons, neither oral progesterone nor any other medication appears to be associated with an improvement in pregnancy outcomes (very low-certainty evidence).
Topics: Abortion, Spontaneous; Chorionic Gonadotropin; Clomiphene; Coitus; Female; Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone; Humans; Insemination; Letrozole; Lipopolysaccharides; Live Birth; Luteal Phase; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Rate; Progesterone
PubMed: 36000704
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012396.pub2 -
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics Aug 2023To investigate the optimal route of progesterone administration for luteal phase support in a frozen embryo transfer. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To investigate the optimal route of progesterone administration for luteal phase support in a frozen embryo transfer.
DESIGN
Systematic review.
PATIENTS
Women undergoing frozen embryo transfer (FET).
INTERVENTIONS
We conducted an extensive database search of Medline (PubMed), Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Trials Register using relevant keywords and their combinations to find randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the routes (i.e., oral, vaginal, intramuscular) of progesterone administration for luteal phase support (LPS) in artificial FET.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
Clinical pregnancy, live birth, miscarriage.
RESULTS
Four RCTs with 3245 participants undergoing artificial endometrial preparation (EP) cycles during FET were found to be eligible. Four trials compared vaginal progesterone with intramuscular progesterone and two trials compared vaginal progesterone with oral progesterone. One study favored of vaginal versus oral progesterone for clinical pregnancy rates (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.22-0.92) and other study favored intramuscular versus vaginal progesterone for clinical pregnancy rates (RR 1.46, 95% CI 1.21-1.76) and live birth rates (RR 1.62, 95% CI 1.28-2.05). Tabulation of overall evidence strength assessment showed low-quality evidence on the basis that for each outcome-comparison pair, there were deficiencies in either directness of outcome measurement or study quality.
CONCLUSION
There was little consensus and evidence was heterogeneous on the optimal route of administration of progesterone for LPS during FET in artificial EP cycles. This warrants more trials, indirect comparisons, and network meta-analyses.
PROPERO NO
CRD42021251017.
Topics: Pregnancy; Female; Humans; Progesterone; Luteal Phase; Lipopolysaccharides; Embryo Transfer; Pregnancy Rate
PubMed: 35943567
DOI: 10.1007/s00404-022-06674-2 -
Annals of Palliative Medicine Jul 2022Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) has been reported to treat infertile women with luteal phase deficiency (LPD) in some clinical studies, however, the efficacy and safety of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) has been reported to treat infertile women with luteal phase deficiency (LPD) in some clinical studies, however, the efficacy and safety of CHM for LPD are still under controversy. Here, we aim to evaluate the efficacy and safety of CHM using meta-analysis, and further compare it with conventional Western therapies (CWT) to elucidate the improvement in progestin and clinical pregnancy rates.
METHODS
Eight randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 465 women were included in our systematic review; these RCTs compared CHM with CWT in treating LPD in infertile women. The methodological quality of the included RCTs was assessed according to the Cochrane risk-of-bias assessment criteria. The data were analyzed by Review Manager 5.3 software. We estimated the risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous data and calculated the mean difference for continuous data.
RESULTS
In contrast to CWT, CHM was superior in improving clinical pregnancy rates (RR 0.19; 95% CI: 0.11-0.27; P<0.001), increasing progesterone levels in the luteal phase [mean difference (MD) 2.28; 95% CI: 1.91-2.64; P<0.001] and luteal phase estrogen (MD 9.88; 95% CI: 4.53-15.24; P=0.0003), reducing traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) syndrome scores (MD -3.06; 95% CI: -3.95 to -2.17; P<0.001), and the incidence of adverse reactions (RR 0.12; 95% CI: 0.02-0.70; P=0.02).
CONCLUSIONS
Evidence from eight small studies suggested that CHM has a therapeutic effect on infertile women with luteal insufficiency. We indicated that CHM may improve the level of progesterone and estradiol in the luteal phase, and the clinical pregnancy rate, with few side effects based on the current studies. However, given the relatively small number of included studies, further studies about the higher quality of study designs, larger population and the underlying mechanism are required to elucidate the role of CHM in LPD treatment.
Topics: Drugs, Chinese Herbal; Female; Humans; Luteal Phase; Pregnancy; Progesterone; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 35927782
DOI: 10.21037/apm-22-792 -
Scientific Reports Jul 2022Hormone replacement therapy (HRT) is widely used to relieve menopausal symptoms; however, it remains unclear whether the use of HRT was associated with gastric cancer.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Hormone replacement therapy (HRT) is widely used to relieve menopausal symptoms; however, it remains unclear whether the use of HRT was associated with gastric cancer. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to synthesize available evidence. This study followed the PRISMA guideline to report meta-analysis. PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library were searched from conception through 23 February 2022. Eligible studies reporting risk of gastric cancer after HRT were screened and accessed by two independent reviewers. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to calculate pooled risk estimate as relative risk (RR, 95% CI). Pre-established review protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021281260). Among the 1095 articles identified, we included 11 studies with 1,919,089 women in this meta-analysis. The combined risk estimate (RR, 0.72; 95% CI 0.64-0.81; I = 2%) indicated that the use of HRT was associated with a 28% reduction in risk of gastric cancer compared with those who had no HRT exposure. The narrow prediction interval (0.62-0.84) for gastric cancer risk suggested a low between-study variance. In subgroup analysis defined by HRT formulation, there were reduction in risks of gastric cancer after the use of estrogen-only therapy (Pooled RR, 0.63; 95% CI 0.51-0.77, I = 0%) and estrogen-progestin therapy (Pooled RR, 0.70; 95% CI 0.57-0.87; I = 0%), as compared with non-users. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, the use of HRT was associated with a reduced gastric cancer risk regardless of HRT formulation. Further investigations are warranted to confirm underlying mechanisms.
Topics: Estrogen Replacement Therapy; Estrogens; Female; Hormone Replacement Therapy; Humans; Risk; Stomach Neoplasms
PubMed: 35906381
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-17345-2 -
Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology Sep 2022While there are literature reporting increased incidence of hair loss in COVID-19 patients, insufficient evidence exists on the topic to date. This review aims to... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
While there are literature reporting increased incidence of hair loss in COVID-19 patients, insufficient evidence exists on the topic to date. This review aims to identify the existing evidence and clinical characteristics of hair loss with COVID-19 infection.
METHODS
Following the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews, MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched for all peer-reviewed articles with relevant keywords including "Alopecia," "Telogen Effluvium (TE)," and "COVID-19" from their inception to November 20, 2021.
RESULTS
A total of 26 articles, with 9 observational studies and 17 case reports or series (a total of 58 cases), were included. Most studies dealt with TE. There were no clear trends between COVID-19 severity and the extent of hair loss. Analysis of the 58 cases also found similar results with most of the cases being female (82.8%), the median onset of hair loss of 2.0 months, and the median time to recovery of hair loss of 5.0 months with a resolution rate of 95%.
CONCLUSION
While this systematic review revealed uncertainty and a lack of strong evidence regarding the association of COVID-19 and hair loss, hair loss in COVID-19 may mainly include TE and be reversible in nature. Future studies are warranted to determine the detailed pathophysiology and risk factors of hair loss in COVID-19, including possible roles of estrogen, progesterone, and pro-inflammatory cytokines.
Topics: Alopecia; Alopecia Areata; COVID-19; Cytokines; Estrogens; Female; Humans; Male; Progesterone
PubMed: 35801366
DOI: 10.1111/jocd.15218 -
Women's Health (London, England) 2022Implanon discontinuation before the recommended time is problematic, as it puts women at risk of unwanted pregnancies and unsafe abortions, along with negative maternal... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Implanon discontinuation before the recommended time is problematic, as it puts women at risk of unwanted pregnancies and unsafe abortions, along with negative maternal health outcomes. Although the magnitude and determinants of Implanon discontinuation have been studied in Ethiopia, the results were inconsistent, with significant variability. Hence, this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed at estimating the pooled prevalence of Implanon discontinuation and its determinants in Ethiopia.
METHODS
A comprehensive search of studies published before 18 February 2022 was done using electronic databases such as PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar, Scopus, Web of Science, Science Direct, and Cochrane Library. The relevant data were extracted using a Microsoft Excel 2013 and analyzed using STATA Version 16. A random-effect meta-analysis model was used to compute pooled prevalence and odds ratio. The Cochrane test statistics and tests were used to assess the heterogeneity of the included studies. A funnel plot, Begg's, and Egger's tests were used to check for the presence of publication bias.
RESULTS
A total of 11 studies with 4320 study participants were included in this meta-analysis. The overall pooled prevalence of Implanon discontinuation in Ethiopia was found to be 32.62% (95% confidence interval = 24.10, 41.13). There was significant heterogeneity among the included studies ( = 97.4%, < 0.001). However, there was no statistical evidence of publication bias ( = 0.533). Dissatisfied with service provision at the time of insertion (odds ratio = 3.92, 95% confidence interval = 1.54, 6.29), not having pre-insertion counseling (odds ratio = 2.98, 95% confidence interval = 1.91, 5.04), the absence of post-insertion follow-up (odds ratio = 4.03, 95% confidence interval = 2.17, 5.90), and the presence of side effects (odds ratio = 2.93, 95% confidence interval = 1.87, 3.98) were found to be determinants of Implanon discontinuation.
CONCLUSION
According to this systematic review and meta-analysis, one-third of Ethiopian women discontinued Implanon before the recommended time (3 years). Program managers and service providers should consider using more evidence-based and participatory counseling approaches to enhance client satisfaction. Furthermore, family planning service delivery points should be equipped to manage and reassure women who are experiencing side effects.
Topics: Black People; Desogestrel; Ethiopia; Female; Humans; Pregnancy; Prevalence
PubMed: 35762596
DOI: 10.1177/17455057221109222