Intrauterine contraception for adolescents aged 14-18 years: a multicenter randomized pilot study of levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system compared to the Copper T 380A. Adolescent and young women's experience with the vaginal ring and oral contraceptive pills. Clinical performance of a levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system and oral contraceptives in young nulliparous women: a comparative study.
Intrauterine contraception can provide adolescents with effective, long-term contraception as well as with other health benefits. In adult populations, intrauterine contraception rates highly in patient satisfaction and safety. It is rarely prescribed to adolescents because of limited data.
                Multicenter, randomized, controlled, participant-blinded pilot study of 14-18-year-old females assigned to the Copper T 380A intrauterine device or the Levonorgestrel Intrauterine System. Participants were followed up for 6 months following insertion.
                We enrolled 23 participants; 12 received the Levonorgestrel Intrauterine System, and 11 received the Copper T 380A. At 6 months, the continuation rates were 75% for the Levonorgestrel Intrauterine System users and 45% for the Copper T 380A users (p=.15). Two Copper T 380A users experienced partial expulsion. Heavy bleeding and pelvic pain were the most commonly reported side effects. Participants rated both methods favorably.
                This study shows that at 6 months, though not statistically significant, adolescent continuation rates trended towards being greater with the Levonorgestrel Intrauterine System compared to the Copper T 380A. These pilot data will be helpful in the design of a larger trial of intrauterine contraception use among adolescents. To compare acceptability of the vaginal contraceptive ring to that of oral contraceptive pills.
                Randomized, cross-over, 6-month study.
                Urban family planning clinic for young low-income patients.
                Sexually active females aged 15-21 years (n = 130).
                Participants were randomly assigned to use the vaginal ring or oral contraceptive pills for an initial study interval of three 28-day cycles, followed by three cycles of the alternate method.
                Participants completed surveys about method use, acceptability, and side effects at baseline, after three cycles, and after six cycles. We analyzed study data using ANOVA models for cross-over designs.
                We did not detect higher compliance with the ring as compared to oral contraceptive pills (P = 0.176), although overall approval of the ring was significantly higher on several items measured, including liked using method (P = 0.015), would recommend it to friends (P = 0.012), and not as hard to remember to use method correctly (P < or = 0.000). Participants were less worried about health risks while using the ring (P = 0.006), but reported that the ring was more likely to interfere with sex than the pill (P < or = 0.001) and that sex partners liked the pill (P = 0.034). Most women did not report bothersome side effects with either method.
                Adolescent and young women showed favorable acceptability of the vaginal contraceptive ring compared to oral contraceptive pills. This 1-year randomized study was carried out at family-planning clinics of two university hospitals to compare the safety and acceptability of a levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG IUS) and oral contraceptives (OCs) in young nulliparous women. The study population consisted of 200 women aged 18-25 years seeking contraception. Ninety-four women entered the LNG IUS group and 99 entered the OC group. Continuation rates, reasons leading to discontinuation, adverse events, menstrual questionnaires, subjective well-being and sexual behavior were evaluated. Nineteen women (20%) in the LNG IUS group discontinued the study during the 1-year observation period, and 27 discontinued (27%) in the OC group. The most common reason (31%) for discontinuation in the IUS group was pain. In the OC group, hormonal side effects were the predominant medical reason for study termination. The safety and acceptability of the LNG IUS for contraception was observed to be as good as with OCs, with a high continuation rate.
Current evidence is insufficient to compare contraceptive efficacy and continuation rates for hormonal and intrauterine methods in women aged 25 years and younger. Limited data suggests that the levonorgestrel intrauterine system may be an acceptable alternative to the combined oral contraceptive in this population.