Objectives: To assess the reasons why women chose the combined oral contraceptive (COC) containing ethinylestradiol 30μg and drospirenone 3mg, their perception of it, and their satisfaction with it when used in clinical practice.
Methods: This was an uncontrolled survey of women using the ethinylestradiol 30μg/drospirenone 3mg COC in 15 European countries from September to December 2004. The women were invited to participate in this study by their general practitioner, gynecologist, or other family planning provider. The women were asked to complete a four-part questionnaire retrospectively about why they chose the ethinylestradiol 30μg/drospirenone 3mg COC and their experiences with it.
Results: A total of 10 947 questionnaires were returned and included in the analysis. Of the respondents, 7694 (70%) had switched to the ethinylestradiol 30μg/drospirenone 3mg COC from other oral contraceptives. About two-thirds (6797 [62%]) of respondents stated that they felt better while using the ethinylestradiol 30μg/drospirenone 3mg COC compared with the time before they started using it. The severity of premenstrual symptoms including depressed mood, irritability, breast tenderness or pain, abdominal bloating or swelling, skin and hair problems, and swelling of the extremities all improved during treatment with the ethinylestradiol 30μg/drospirenone 3mg COC. Overall, 10 441 (95%) respondents were satisfied or very satisfied with the ethinylestradiol 30μg/drospirenone 3mg COC and 9016 (82%) would recommend it to a friend.
Conclusion: The additional non-contraceptive benefits of the ethinylestradiol 30μg/drospirenone 3mg COC are important factors that influence patients’ perceptions of this oral contraceptive and their satisfaction with its use.
Skouby SO. Contraceptive use and behavior in the 21st century: a comprehensive study across five European countries. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care 2004; 9(2): 57–68PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenberg MJ, Waugh MS, Long S. Unintended pregnancies and use, misuse and discontinuation of oral contraceptives. J Reprod Med 1995 May; 40(5): 355–60PubMedGoogle Scholar
Rosenberg MJ, Waugh MS. Oral contraceptive discontinuation: a prospective evaluation of frequency and reasons. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1998; 179: 577–82PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Potter LS. Oral contraceptive compliance and its role in the effectiveness of the method. New York: Raven Press Ltd, 1991Google Scholar
Potter L, Oakley D, de Leon-Wong E, et al. Measuring compliance among oral contraceptive users. Fam Plann Perspect 1996; 28(4): 154–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenberg MJ, Waugh MS, Burnhill MS. Compliance, counseling and satisfaction with oral contraceptives: a prospective evaluation. Fam Plann Perspect 1998; 30(2): 89–92, 104PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heinemann LA, Thiel C, Assmann A, et al. Frequency and reasons for switching/ stopping use of oral contraceptives: results of the German Cohort Study on Women Health. Zentralbl Gynakol 2001; 123(10): 568–77PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krattenmacher R. Drospirenone: pharmacology and pharmacokinetics of a unique progestogen. Contraception 2000 Jul; 62(1): 29–38PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foidart J-M, Wuttke W, Bouw GM, et al. A comparative investigation of contraceptive reliability, cycle control and tolerance of two monophasic oral contraceptives containing either drospirenone or desogestrel. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care 2000; 5(2): 124–34PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huber J, Foidart JM, Wuttke W, et al. Efficacy and tolerability of a monophasic oral contraceptive containing ethinylestradiol and drospirenone. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care 2000; 5(1): 25–34PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parsey KS, Pong A. An open-label, multicenter study to evaluate Yasmin, a lowdose combination oral contraceptive containing drospirenone, a new progestogen. Contraception 2000; 61(2): 105–11PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thorneycroft IH, Gollnick H, Schellschmidt I. Superiority of a combined oral contraceptive containing drospirenone to a triphasic preparation containing norgestimate in acne treatment. Cutis 2004; 74: 123–30PubMedGoogle Scholar
van Vloten WA, van Haselen CW, van Zuuren EJ, et al. The effect of 2 combined oral contraceptives containing either drospirenone or cyproterone acetate on acne and seborrhea. Cutis 2002; 69Suppl. 4: 2–15Google Scholar
Medical Outcomes Trust and QualityMetric Incorporated. SF-36 health survey [online]. Available from URL: http://www.sf-36.org/tools/pdf/SF-36vl_Standard_Sample. pdf [Accessed 2006 Apr 11]Google Scholar
Poindexter AN, Burkman R, Fisher AC, et al. Cycle control, tolerability, and satisfaction among women switching from 30–35 microg ethinyl estradiol-containing oral contraceptives to the triphasic norgestimate/25 microg ethinyl estradiol-containing oral contraceptive Ortho Tri-Cyclen LO. Int J Fertil Womens Med 2003; 48(4): 163–72PubMedGoogle Scholar
Sulak P, Lippman J, Siu C, et al. Clinical comparison of triphasic norgestimate/35 micrograms ethinyl estradiol and monophasic norethindrone acetate/20 micrograms ethinyl estradiol: cycle control, lipid effects, and user satisfaction. Contraception 1999; 59(3): 161–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boschitsch E, Skarabis H, Wuttke W, et al. The acceptability of a novel oral contraceptive containing drospirenone and its effect on well-being. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care 2000; 5Suppl. 3: 34–40PubMedGoogle Scholar
Freeman EW, Kroll R, Rapkin A, et al. Evaluation of a unique oral contraceptive in the treatment of premenstrual dysphoric disorder. J Womens Health Gend Based Med 2001; 10(6): 561–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown C, Ling F, Wan J. A new monophasic oral contraceptive containing drospirenone: effect on perimenstrual symptoms. J Reprod Med 2002; 47(1): 14–22PubMedGoogle Scholar