Implanon versus Copper-T as long-acting reversible contraception: a prospective comparative study at a tertiary care centre in Southern Rajasthan
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20261262Keywords:
Acceptance, Copper-T, Efficacy, Implanon, Long-acting reversible contraceptionAbstract
Background: Long-acting reversible contraceptives (LARCs) such as sub-dermal etonogestrel implants and copper intrauterine devices provide highly effective contraception. However, their acceptance and continuation vary due to side effects and user preference. To compare Implanon and Copper T as long acting reversible contraceptive methods in terms of efficacy, acceptance, continuation and side effect profile among women attending a tertiary care centre in Southern Rajasthan.
Methods: A comparative prospective study was conducted in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, RNT Medical College, Udaipur, from March to August 2024. Women aged 18–45 years opting for either Implanon or Copper-T were enrolled. Data on efficacy, adverse effects, acceptance and continuation were collected and analysed using Jamovi software.
Results: Among 303 participants, 189 opted for Implanon and 114 for Copper-T. Continuation rate was significantly higher with Implanon (97.4%) compared to Copper-T (88.6%). No pregnancies were reported among Implanon users, while one pregnancy occurred in the Copper-T group (efficacy 99.1%). Implanon users commonly reported amenorrhoea (45.2%) and menstrual irregularities (40%), whereas Copper-T users experienced heavy menstrual bleeding (30%), dysmenorrhoea (24%) and abdominal pain (25%). Younger women (21–30 years) and lower parity women preferred Implanon, while higher parity women preferred Copper-T.
Conclusions: Both Implanon and Copper-T are highly effective LARC methods. Implanon demonstrated better acceptance and continuation, while Copper-T remains an effective non-hormonal alternative. Individualised counselling is essential to optimise contraceptive choice.’
References
Bearak J, Popinchalk A, Beavin C, Ganatra B, Moller AB, Tunçalp Ö, et al. Unintended pregnancy and abortion by income, region and the legal status of abortion: estimates from a comprehensive model for 1990–2019. Lancet Glob Health. 2022;10(4):482–9.
Cheng D, Schwarz EB, Douglas E, Horon I. Unintended pregnancy and associated maternal preconception, prenatal and postpartum behaviours. Contraception. 2009;79(3):194–8.
Sedgh G, Bearak J, Singh S, Bankole A, Popinchalk A, Ganatra B, et al. Abortion incidence between 1990 and 2014: global, regional and subregional levels and trends. Lancet. 2016;388(10041):258–67.
Ganatra B, Gerdts C, Rossier C, Johnson BR Jr, Tunçalp Ö, Assifi A, et al. Global, regional and subregional classification of abortions by safety, 2010–14: estimates from a Bayesian hierarchical model. Lancet. 2017;390(10110):2372–81.
Ali M, Bahamondes L, Landoulsi S. Extended effectiveness of the etonogestrel-releasing contraceptive implant and the 20 μg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system for 2 years beyond US FDA product labeling. Glob Health Sci Pract. 2017;5(4):534–9.
Winner B, Peipert JF, Zhao Q, Buckel C, Madden T, Allsworth JE, et al. Effectiveness of long-acting reversible contraception. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(21):1998–2007.
Kopp Kallner H, Thunell L, Brynhildsen J, Danielsson KG. Use of contraception and attitudes towards contraceptive use in Swedish women: a nationwide survey. PLoS One. 2015;10(5):125990.
Funk S, Miller MM, Mishell DR Jr, Archer DF, Poindexter A, Schmidt J, et al. Safety and efficacy of Implanon™, a single-rod implantable contraceptive containing etonogestrel. Contraception. 2005;71(5):319–26.
Darney PD. The single-rod etonogestrel implant: a review of clinical studies. Contraception. 2002;65(1):29–37.
Grimes DA, Lopez LM, Manion C, Schulz KF. Cochrane systematic reviews of IUD trials: lessons learned. Contraception. 2007;75(6):55–9.
Halpern V, Lopez LM, Grimes DA, Stockton LL, Gallo MF. Strategies to improve adherence and acceptability of hormonal methods of contraception. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;(10):4317.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
