A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Home or office etonogestrel implant insertion after pregnancy: a randomized trial. | LitMetric

Home or office etonogestrel implant insertion after pregnancy: a randomized trial.

Contraception

Thomas Jefferson University School of Medicine, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, 833 Chestnut St, Philadelphia, PA 19107.

Published: November 2016

Objectives: To evaluate whether home visits for contraceptive implant insertion result in an increase in postpartum uptake compared to clinic insertion and to assess the feasibility of home insertions.

Study Design: We randomized women within 10 weeks of a birth or dilation and curettage (D&C) for abortion or miscarriage to home or standard office insertion. The primary outcome was successful insertion of the implant. To achieve 80% power to detect a 40% difference in visit attendance, 20 women were assigned to each group. The secondary outcome was attendance of the 4-week postpartum visit.

Results: From June 2013 through February 2014, we screened 45 women and 40 were randomly assigned to home and office insertion visits. We enrolled 37 postpartum women and 3 women post-D&C. Because of the significant under enrollment of the latter, we chose to report results of only the postpartum women. The results were similar whether we included or excluded post-abortion women. A majority of women desired a home visit for their implant insertion appointment at time of enrollment. Postpartum appointment attendance rates were similar between home and office visits at 53% and 50% (p=1.00), respectively. Home visits resulted in a trend toward increased implant uptake [12/19 (63%) vs 6/18 (33%), p=.10].

Conclusion: Home insertion of the contraceptive implant may be a feasible option. Future studies that examine the feasibility and uptake in both postpartum and post-D&C women are warranted.

Implications: Women reported preference for home insertion visits in this pilot study. We also showed that a greater proportion of women received the etonogestrel implant at a home visit compared to the current standard of care, which may warrant larger studies that would have sufficient power to evaluate smaller differences.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2016.06.018DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

implant insertion
12
women
11
insertion
9
etonogestrel implant
8
contraceptive implant
8
office insertion
8
insertion visits
8
postpartum women
8
implant
7
postpartum
6

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!