Evidence Hub

Treatment of vaginal bleeding irregularities induced by progestin only contraceptives

Abdel-Aleem H, d'Arcangues C, Vogelsong KM, Gaffield ML, Gülmezoglu AM

The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2013

3,677 participants · 7 citations

Abstract

Background: Despite their high effectiveness, progestin-only contraceptives are considered less than ideal by the many women who experience irregular vaginal bleeding when using them. Current treatments to control these bleeding problems are not sufficiently effective.

Objectives: We evaluated preventive and therapeutic approaches to normalise bleeding irregularities associated with the use of progestin-only contraceptives.

Search methods: Literature was identified through database searches, reference lists, organisations and individuals, covering the period until May-June 2012.

Selection criteria: Trials with random or systematic allocation, testing interventions for the prevention or treatment of bleeding irregularities associated with the use of progestin-only contraceptives were eligible.

Data collection and analysis: Results are expressed as relative risks (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for categorical data and as weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% CI for continuous data. When we encountered heterogeneity (visual or statistical) we used the random-effects model (quantitative) or did not produce a summary estimate (qualitative).

Main results: Thirty-three randomised controlled trials enrolling 3677 participants were included. Two thirds of the trials were determined to reflect low to moderate risk of bias.Estrogen treatments reduced the number of days of an ongoing bleeding episode in DMPA and Norplant users. However, treatment frequently led to more…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 3,677 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free