Modern women choose contraceptive vaginal ring

This survey introduces up-to-date statistic data on women’s reproductive health considering current control methods. It includes literature analysis on the contraceptive vaginal ring (CVR) use. Evidential medicine proves that CVR is a long-standing, safe and effective birth control method. CVR usage definitely wins the battle against oral contraception and prolonged contraception methods. The survey includes current patients’ survey results concerning CVR usability particularly during sex. VR’s effect on vagina microbiota and cervix epithelium is also covered, considering the discussions on cervix cancer increase caused by long-term use of combined hormonal contraceptives. Recently, there has been some positive trend towards the protection of reproductive health. However, we have to admit that there are still many unresolved issues, in particular, unavailability of adequate family planning counselling services and advanced effective birth control methods. The pharmaceutical market is saturated with various birth control methods. A careful analysis of medical history details and test results makes it easy to choose the best possible and safe birth control method with due regard of the patients’ wishes. Bearing in mind the less pronounced systemic effect, ease of use, and a favourable safety profile, the choice of CVR as a birth control method seems to be the best solution for women

[1]  T. Anothaisintawee,et al.  Association of Hormonal Contraceptive Use With Adverse Health Outcomes , 2022, JAMA network open.

[2]  A. Edelman,et al.  Contraception Selection, Effectiveness, and Adverse Effects: A Review. , 2021, JAMA.

[3]  S. Achilles,et al.  Vaginal ring acceptability: A systematic review and meta-analysis of vaginal ring experiences from around the world , 2021, Contraception.

[4]  K. Workowski,et al.  Sexually Transmitted Infections Treatment Guidelines, 2021 , 2021, MMWR. Recommendations and reports : Morbidity and mortality weekly report. Recommendations and reports.

[5]  J. H. van de Wijgert,et al.  Acceptability and Satisfaction of Contraceptive Vaginal Rings in Clinical Studies: A Systematic Review and Narrative Synthesis , 2021, Frontiers in Global Women's Health.

[6]  S. Asthana,et al.  Oral contraceptives use and risk of cervical cancer-A systematic review & meta-analysis. , 2020, European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology.

[7]  Mark C. Wheldon,et al.  Estimating progress towards meeting women’s contraceptive needs in 185 countries: A Bayesian hierarchical modelling study , 2020, PLoS medicine.

[8]  A. van der Straten,et al.  Vaginal ring acceptability and related preferences among women in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review and narrative synthesis , 2019, PloS one.

[9]  K. Underhill,et al.  A Qualitative Systematic Review of Women's Experiences Using Contraceptive Vaginal Rings: Implications for New Technologies. , 2019, Perspectives on sexual and reproductive health.

[10]  J. H. van de Wijgert,et al.  Contraceptive rings promote vaginal lactobacilli in a high bacterial vaginosis prevalence population: A randomised, open-label longitudinal study in Rwandan women , 2018, PloS one.

[11]  J. H. van de Wijgert,et al.  High acceptability of a contraceptive vaginal ring among women in Kigali, Rwanda , 2018, PloS one.

[12]  J. H. van de Wijgert,et al.  A randomised trial of a contraceptive vaginal ring in women at risk of HIV infection in Rwanda: Safety of intermittent and continuous use , 2018, PloS one.

[13]  A. López-Picado,et al.  Efficacy and side-effects profile of the ethinylestradiol and etonogestrel contraceptive vaginal ring: a systematic review and meta-analysis , 2017, The European journal of contraception & reproductive health care : the official journal of the European Society of Contraception.

[14]  P. Su,et al.  Efficacy and safety of the contraceptive vaginal ring (NuvaRing) compared with a combined oral contraceptive in Chinese women: a 1-year randomised trial , 2016, European journal of contraception & reproductive health care.

[15]  J. Jensen,et al.  Evaluating the efficacy and safety of a progestin- and estrogen-releasing ethylene vinyl acetate copolymer contraceptive vaginal ring , 2014, Expert opinion on drug safety.

[16]  M. Guida,et al.  Sexual life impact evaluation of different hormonal contraceptives on the basis of their methods of administration , 2014, Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics.

[17]  A. Chauhan,et al.  Multicenter Study of Contraceptive Vaginal Ring (NuvaRing®) in Normal Daily Practice in Indian Women , 2014, The Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology of India.

[18]  N. Persico,et al.  Clitoral vascularization and sexual behavior in young patients treated with drospirenone-ethinyl estradiol or contraceptive vaginal ring: a prospective, randomized, pilot study. , 2014, The journal of sexual medicine.

[19]  J. M. Marín,et al.  Vaginal health in contraceptive vaginal ring users – A review , 2013, The European journal of contraception & reproductive health care : the official journal of the European Society of Contraception.

[20]  A. Buysse,et al.  Relation of androgen receptor sensitivity and mood to sexual desire in hormonal contraception users. , 2012, Contraception.

[21]  J. Esplugues,et al.  Is the vagina an adequate route for the administration of hormonal contraceptives? , 2010, Current drug metabolism.

[22]  G. Merki-Feld,et al.  Clinical experience with the combined contraceptive vaginal ring in Switzerland, including a subgroup analysis of previous hormonal contraceptive use , 2010, The European journal of contraception & reproductive health care : the official journal of the European Society of Contraception.

[23]  M. Consolaro,et al.  Can Lactobacillus acidophilus influence the adhesion capacity of Candida albicans on the combined contraceptive vaginal ring? , 2010, Contraception.

[24]  P. Inki,et al.  Efficacy of contraceptive methods: A review of the literature , 2010, The European journal of contraception & reproductive health care : the official journal of the European Society of Contraception.

[25]  N. Mendoza,et al.  Self-described impact of noncompliance among users of a combined hormonal contraceptive method. , 2008, Contraception.

[26]  I. Milsom,et al.  Efficacy, acceptability and tolerability of the combined contraceptive ring, NuvaRing, compared with an oral contraceptive containing 30 microg of ethinyl estradiol and 3 mg of drospirenone. , 2006, Contraception.

[27]  R. Cagiano,et al.  Comparison profiles of cycle control, side effects and sexual satisfaction of three hormonal contraceptives. , 2006, Contraception.

[28]  C. Westhoff,et al.  Acceptability and satisfaction using Quick Start with the contraceptive vaginal ring versus an oral contraceptive. , 2006, Contraception.

[29]  F. Roumen,et al.  The combined contraceptive vaginal ring (NuvaRing®): First experience in daily clinical practice in The Netherlands , 2006, The European journal of contraception & reproductive health care : the official journal of the European Society of Contraception.

[30]  M. Guida,et al.  Effects of two types of hormonal contraception--oral versus intravaginal--on the sexual life of women and their partners. , 2005, Human reproduction.

[31]  D. Mishell,et al.  Contraceptive vaginal rings releasing Nestorone and ethinylestradiol: a 1-year dose-finding trial. , 2005, Contraception.

[32]  D. Apter,et al.  Efficacy, tolerability and acceptability of a novel contraceptive vaginal ring releasing etonogestrel and ethinyl oestradiol. , 2001, Human reproduction.

[33]  C. Timmer,et al.  Pharmacokinetics of Etonogestrel and Ethinylestradiol Released from a Combined Contraceptive Vaginal Ring , 2000, Clinical pharmacokinetics.

[34]  C. Loge,et al.  Development and Validation of an Acceptability and Satisfaction Questionnaire for a Contraceptive Vaginal Ring, NuvaRing® , 2012, PharmacoEconomics.