Skip to content
BY-NC-ND 3.0 license Open Access Published by De Gruyter Open Access August 9, 2011

Combined hormone contraceptive choice experience in Czech Republic

  • Tomas Fait EMAIL logo
From the journal Open Medicine


The aim of the prospective, multicenter project was to evaluate the effect of standardized information on the decision of woman when selecting application routes for combined hormonal contraceptives (CC). Selection the route of CC’s administration before and after consultation with the physician was evaluated on the group of 1326 women in 125 centres in the Czech Republic using a questionnaire. Analysis of the difference between the intended (4,1%) and selected (33,9%, CI 95% 31%–38%, 451 women) contraception shows that the vaginal ring preference increased by 29,8% (CI 97,5% 26,9%–32,8%, p < 0,0001). The difference for the weekly patch after (5,7%) and prior (4,2%) to the counseling of 1,4% was borderline statistically significant (CI 97,5%–0,002%–3,0%, p = 0,05). Preference of COC remained practically unchanged at 53,5%. Vaginal ring was selected by 45,2% of undecided women and 28,0% of women, who considered other than combined hormonal contraception. Easibility of application, efficacy and cycle control are the most important predictors for contraception choice. Following expert advice, including information on all forms of combined oral contraceptives, more than 33% of women chose the latest application form of combined hormonal contraceptives - vaginal ring.

[1] Fait T. Importance for the consultation for combined hormonal contraception choice. Ces Gynek 2011, 76,2: 140–144 Search in Google Scholar

[2] Fiebig DG, Knox S, Viney R et al. Preferences for new and existing contraceptive products. Health Econ. 2010 Nov 24. [Epub ahead of print] 10.1002/hec.1686Search in Google Scholar

[3] Kaminskyy V., Bitzer J., Tatarchuk T., Oddens B. Contraceptive health education research program in women considering combined hormone contraception. Eur J Contracept Health Care 2010, 15,Suppl 1: 57 Search in Google Scholar

[4] Kocourkova J., Fait T. Changes in contraceptive practice and the transition of reproduction pattern in the Czech population. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care 2011, 16,3:161–172 in Google Scholar

[5] Kost K, Singh S, Vaughan B et al. Estimates of contraceptive failure from the 2002 National Survey of Family Growth. Contraception. 2008; 77(1): 10–21 in Google Scholar

[6] Lete I., Doval JL., Pérez-Campos E. et al. Factors affecting women’s selection of a combined hormonal contraceptive method: the TEAM-06 Spanish crosssectional study. Contraception 2007, 76(2), p. 77–83 in Google Scholar

[7] Saeed G.A., Fakhar S, Rahim F, Tabassum S. Change in trend of contraceptive uptake-effect of educational leaflets and counselling. Contraception 2008, 77, p. 377–381 in Google Scholar

[8] Shunmann C, Glacier A. Specialist contraceptive counselling and provision after termination of pregnancy improves uptake of long-acting methods but does not prevent repeat abortion: a randomized trial. Hum Reprod 2006, 21: 2296–2303 in Google Scholar

[9] May WL., Johnson WD. A SAS macro for constructing simultaneous confidence intervals for multinomial proportions. Computer methods and programs in Biomedicine 1997, 53, p. 153–162 in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2011-8-9
Published in Print: 2011-10-1

© 2011 Versita Warsaw

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Downloaded on 1.3.2024 from
Scroll to top button