Introduction
Oral contraceptives were first approved by the FDA in 1960 (Christensen, 2011). It was first used to only prevent pregnancy, however, now it is used to prevent the transmission of infections, minimizing symptoms of menstruation, and more obviously to prevent pregnancy. In 2012, 62% of women at the reproductive age were using some form of contraception (CDC, 2012). This systematic review addresses progestin based contraceptives and combined contraceptives. The progestin based oral contraceptives differs from the combined oral contraceptive by only containing progestin while the combined contraceptive contains both progestin and estrogen. Both of the selected hormonal contraceptive methods have an effective rate of 91%, meaning …show more content…
The Natural Family Planning (NFP) method utilizes biological signs of the woman’s body to determine times of fertility and infertility within the menstrual cycle. The biological observations may include, “vaginal bleeding, external mucus discharge, and presence of vulvar dryness as the biomarkers to identify the phases of the menstrual cycle” (McVeigh, 2013). Although the NFP method is very intricate and can be complicated, the biomarkers are scientifically accurate at determining which phase of the menstrual cycle women are experiencing. While the goal of the hormonal contraceptives are to manipulate women’s hormones, so they are infertile for a period of time, the NFP method does not interfere with women 's natural menstrual cycle. Because no interference occurs in the female body, no adverse side effects are experienced. Many studies show the effectiveness of avoiding pregnancy using the NFP method are more effective than many oral contraceptives if the NFP method is performed properly. This systematic review utilizes the NFP method as a baseline for efficacy and safety.
During this review the question addressed will focus primarily on the side effects caused by progestin based contraceptives and combination contraceptives. The control group consists of females practicing …show more content…
Systematic searches of PubMed, Cochrane Library, and CINAHL were completed by three reviewers (K.G., A.L., K.M.) using the keywords progestin AND oral contraceptives and combined birth control. The first reviewer (K.M.) performed a search using the designated keywords selected by the research group. Using Cochrane Library, the first researcher used the words oral contraceptive AND progestin AND combined. This search yielded 35 articles. After selecting peer reviewed articles, the researcher was left with 34 articles. From here, she changed the publication date to only include articles from 2010-2016, which left her with 31 articles. Out of these 31 articles, she excluded 9 due to their relevance focusing on the user having diabetes, or another previous medical condition. She then excluded another 5 articles that only focus on the rate of contraception. Narrowing it down further, she then excluded another 6 articles that focus solely on the use of contraceptives to treat conditions associated with the female reproductive system. Out of the remaining 11 articles, 6 were eliminated based upon their overall relevance to the research question. Five peer reviewed articles were then selected by the first reviewer to examine
Oral contraceptives were first approved by the FDA in 1960 (Christensen, 2011). It was first used to only prevent pregnancy, however, now it is used to prevent the transmission of infections, minimizing symptoms of menstruation, and more obviously to prevent pregnancy. In 2012, 62% of women at the reproductive age were using some form of contraception (CDC, 2012). This systematic review addresses progestin based contraceptives and combined contraceptives. The progestin based oral contraceptives differs from the combined oral contraceptive by only containing progestin while the combined contraceptive contains both progestin and estrogen. Both of the selected hormonal contraceptive methods have an effective rate of 91%, meaning …show more content…
The Natural Family Planning (NFP) method utilizes biological signs of the woman’s body to determine times of fertility and infertility within the menstrual cycle. The biological observations may include, “vaginal bleeding, external mucus discharge, and presence of vulvar dryness as the biomarkers to identify the phases of the menstrual cycle” (McVeigh, 2013). Although the NFP method is very intricate and can be complicated, the biomarkers are scientifically accurate at determining which phase of the menstrual cycle women are experiencing. While the goal of the hormonal contraceptives are to manipulate women’s hormones, so they are infertile for a period of time, the NFP method does not interfere with women 's natural menstrual cycle. Because no interference occurs in the female body, no adverse side effects are experienced. Many studies show the effectiveness of avoiding pregnancy using the NFP method are more effective than many oral contraceptives if the NFP method is performed properly. This systematic review utilizes the NFP method as a baseline for efficacy and safety.
During this review the question addressed will focus primarily on the side effects caused by progestin based contraceptives and combination contraceptives. The control group consists of females practicing …show more content…
Systematic searches of PubMed, Cochrane Library, and CINAHL were completed by three reviewers (K.G., A.L., K.M.) using the keywords progestin AND oral contraceptives and combined birth control. The first reviewer (K.M.) performed a search using the designated keywords selected by the research group. Using Cochrane Library, the first researcher used the words oral contraceptive AND progestin AND combined. This search yielded 35 articles. After selecting peer reviewed articles, the researcher was left with 34 articles. From here, she changed the publication date to only include articles from 2010-2016, which left her with 31 articles. Out of these 31 articles, she excluded 9 due to their relevance focusing on the user having diabetes, or another previous medical condition. She then excluded another 5 articles that only focus on the rate of contraception. Narrowing it down further, she then excluded another 6 articles that focus solely on the use of contraceptives to treat conditions associated with the female reproductive system. Out of the remaining 11 articles, 6 were eliminated based upon their overall relevance to the research question. Five peer reviewed articles were then selected by the first reviewer to examine