Emergency contraception: current options, challenges, and future directions

Emergency contraception is a woman's last chance to prevent unintended pregnancy. Ulipristal acetate, a selective progesterone receptor modulator, when taken as a single 30 mg dose, is a new, safe and effective emergency contraceptive that can be used from the first day and up to 5 days following unprotected intercourse. The older progesterone-only emergency contraceptive, levonorgestrel, is taken as two 0.75 mg pills 12 hours apart (Next Choice(®); Watson Pharmaceuticals Inc., Morristown, NJ, USA) or a single 1.5 mg pill (Plan B One-Step™; Watson Pharmaceuticals Inc.), and is approved for only 72 hours after unprotected intercourse. During clinical development, ulipristal acetate has been shown to be more effective than levonorgestrel in delaying or inhibiting ovulation. A recent meta-analysis of two randomized clinical trials showed ulipristal acetate to have a pregnancy risk 42% lower than levonorgestrel up to 72 hours and 65% lower in the first 24 hours following unprotected intercourse. Moreover, when taken beyond 72 hours, significantly more pregnancies were prevented with ulipristal acetate than with levonorgestrel. Side effects are mild and similar to those seen with levonorgestrel. Ulipristal acetate was approved for emergency contraception by the US Food and Drug Administration in August 2010, and has been launched in the USA as ella(®) (Watson Pharmaceuticals Inc.) since December 1, 2010. Ella is prescription only and is priced comparable to Plan B One-Step.

Ulipristal acetate is a progesterone receptor modulator. As an emergency contraceptive, a 30-mg micronized formulation is effective for use up to 120 h from unprotected sexual intercourse. Ulipristal acetate acts as an antagonist of the progesterone receptor at the transcriptional level and a competitive antagonist of glucocorticoid receptor function. In contrast to other contraceptives, it has little effect on sex hormone-binding globulin. Although a single small study demonstrated some potential endometrial effects after ulipristal acetate administration, the clinical relevance of these findings is unclear. The incidence of adverse events in clinical trials for emergency contraception has typically been minimal, with one study showing a higher than expected incidence of nausea upon ulipristal acetate use. Ulipristal acetate, like other emergency contraceptive products, can lengthen the time to the next expected menstruation. Ulipristal acetate may have several advantages over currently approved emergency contraceptives. When compared to levonorgestrel, ulipristal acetate maintains its efficacy for a full 120 h, whereas levonorgestrel formulations have declining efficacy over that time frame. Moreover, although the copper intrauterine device (IUD) is highly effective as an emergency contraceptive, accessibility is an issue since the IUD requires a skilled provider for insertion.

Introduction: Emergency contraceptive agents play a crucial role in preventing unplanned pregnancy. These agents and devices have been studied since the 1960s and have had varied results in terms of side effects and efficacy. A new oral tablet for emergency contraception (EC), ulipristal acetate (UPA), is a selective progesterone receptor modulator and can be used up to 120 h following unprotected intercourse, without an increase in adverse effects or a decrease in efficacy.Areas covered: This article reviews studies that evaluate the pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, clinical efficacy, and safety profile of UPA as an emergency contraceptive agent.Expert opinion: UPA, a selective progesterone receptor modulator, is administered as a single 30 mg dose for EC. This agent provides a comparable, if not better, efficacy and side effect profile than seen with levonorgestrel or mifepristone. Because it has both agonistic and antagonistic effects on the progesterone receptor, ongoing clinical trials are documenting UPA's use for patients with endometriosis and as an extended use contraceptive.

Emergency contraception: A multispecialty survey of clinician knowledge and practices

Canadian Contraception Consensus (Part 2 of 4).

The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and tolerability of two emergency contraception (EC) methods, levonorgestrel versus the Yuzpe. In a prospective, randomized, comparative study, we included 122 healthy volunteers who in the observed cycle had had only one act of unprotected intercourse within 72 h of treatment. They were randomly allocated in levonorgestrol group (n=62) and Yuzpe (n=60). The levonorgestrel regimen consisted of two pills: 0.75 mg levonorgestrel, taken twice in the 12-h interval within 72 h after unprotected intercourse. The Yuzpe method included two HD contraceptive pills taken as another regimen. Data were collected by questionnaire at first and 3 weeks later. The differences were compared with X2 & Fisher exact tests. There were no significant differences between two groups in any of the observed parameters. The levonorgestrel regimen was found superior to Yuzpe because it's more effectiveness (respectively 100% vs 91%, p=0.026) and fewer side effects. The study showed more effectiveness and safety of the levonorgestrel regimen as emergency contraception. Thus we recommend levonorgestrel as an alternative EC method instead of the Yuzpe regimen in Iran or other developing countries in order to decrease unwanted pregnancy.

PurposeIn March 2015, the oral emergency contraceptives levonorgestrel (LNG) and ulipristal acetate (UPA) were released from prescription-only status in Germany. The main research question is to analyse whether the OTC status of oral emergency contraceptives has an influence on the patterns of use.MethodsAll information is based on searches for public domain sources on emergency contraception. Searches were made for scientific publications, statistics, and surveys.ResultsDue to additional active ingredient properties, UPA is superior to LNG in terms of ovulation-inhibiting effect. Since the OTC switch, demand for oral emergency contraceptives has risen by almost 50%, especially at weekends when sexual encounters and thus contraceptive failures are most frequent. However, the age distribution of the users has not changed as a result of the OTC switch. Doctors still play an important role in advising on emergency contraception after the removal of the prescription-only requirement. Pregnancies despite emergency contraception are terminated in more than half of the cases. In federal states with higher rates of use of the morning-after pill, fewer terminations of pregnancy were performed.ConclusionAs a result of the OTC switch, more women and girls use the morning-after pill after unprotected intercourse and the time between unprotected intercourse and taking the oral emergency contraceptive decreases. This is of great advantage in terms of the mechanism of action. UPA is used more frequently than LNG. Only half of all people aged between 16 and 39 years in Germany are aware of the morning-after pill and 94% of women who had a pregnancy terminated in 2015 did not use any emergency contraception after the unprotected intercourse. In the population, there is still a great need for information and education on contraception and emergency contraception.

Unprotected intercourse in the 2 weeks prior to requesting emergency intrauterine contraception

This study was conducted to determine which emergency contraception (EC) methods are offered by community pharmacists in response to patient calls. Female mystery callers called all community pharmacies in two California cities using standardized scripts. The callers inquired about options available to prevent pregnancy after sex and whether that method was available at the pharmacy, using follow-up probes if necessary. A total of 239 calls were completed in San Diego (n = 127, 53%) and San Francisco (n = 112, 47%). Pharmacists indicated availability at most sites (n = 220, 92%) with option(s) reported as levonorgestrel only (LNG; n = 211, 88.3%), both ulipristal acetate (UPA) and LNG (n = 4, 1.6%), UPA only (n = 1, 0.4%), or non-specific EC (n = 4, 1.7%). Nineteen pharmacies (7.9%) did not have EC available on the day of the call. Following additional probing, some pharmacists discussed UPA (n = 49, 20.5%) or the copper intrauterine device (n = 1, 0.4%) as EC options. LNG EC products were available same-day in 90.1% of pharmacies, whereas UPA was available same-day in 9.6% of pharmacies. The majority of pharmacies called in this study offered and stocked at least one EC option, but the focus of discussions was on LNG and matched what was in stock and available.

Vaginal ring delivery of selective progesterone receptor modulators for contraception

Can we identify women at risk of pregnancy despite using emergency contraception? Data from randomized trials of ulipristal acetate and levonorgestrel

Society of Family Planning Clinical Recommendation: Emergency contraception

Use of IUDs for emergency contraception: current perspectives Rebecca McKay,1 Lynne Gilbert2 1Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Peterborough City Hospital, Peterborough, Cambridgeshire, United Kingdom; 2Department of Contraception and Sexual Health, Cambridgeshire Community Services NHS Trust, Cambridge, Cambridgeshire, United Kingdom Abstract: Emergency contraception is an essential intervention for the prevention of unplanned pregnancy worldwide. The copper intrauterine device (IUD) is highly effective at preventing pregnancy after unprotected sex or contraceptive failure. Unfortunately, its usage in this context is low and far exceeded by hormonal forms of emergency contraception. These have higher failure rates and, unlike the IUD, are not effective post-fertilization. This review aims to summarize the literature surrounding IUD use as emergency contraception, contrast it with the hormonal options, and provide suggestions for increased usage. Keywords: levonorgestrel, ulipristal acetate, copper intrauterine device

The two emergency contraceptive drugs ("morning-after pill") ulipristal acetate and levonorgestrel are available without prescription in many European countries. In Albania, ulipristal acetate is not marketed yet and levonorgestrel has still prescription-only status. The objective of this study was to assess the prevalence and socioeconomic correlates of emergency contraceptive (EMC) use, collect sales figures, and gain information on the women's way of purchasing EMCs in post-communist Albania. For this cross-sectional study, self-administered questionnaires were made accessible to women in Albania in March 2015 by hard copy or online via social networks. Women were asked about lifetime use and last year's use of EMCs, and if they purchased EMCs with or without a prescription. Additionally, pharmacies were contacted and asked about EMC sales figures. Of the 205 participating women, 80.5% knew about the availability and use of EMCs, and 15.1% reported EMC use during the previous 12 months. The lifetime prevalence of use was 46.8%. Although having prescription-only status in Albania, 96% of the women bought EMCs without a physician's prescription. Knowledge was significantly lower among the lower educated women and among women residing in small cities. Use of EMCs was significantly higher in women with a weaker financial background and, compared with small cities, in those from large or mid-sized cities. The 54 participating pharmacies (3% of all Albanian pharmacies) reported selling 11 EMCs on average per month. The use of EMCs may be estimated at 0.22 defined daily doses per 1,000 inhabitants per day. Compared to January 2015, EMC sales increased by 17% in February 2016. Compared to other European countries, the prevalence of EMC use seems to be higher in Albania. Use and knowledge of EMCs depend on socioeconomic characteristics. It is recommended to switch EMCs to non-prescription status in transitional Albania.

Background:Ulipristal acetate 30 mg became available as prescription-only emergency contraception in British Columbia, Canada, in September 2015, as an addition to over-the-counter levonorgestrel emergency contraception. In this study, we determined dispensing and practice use patterns for ulipristal acetate, as well as facilitators of and barriers to emergency contraception for physicians, pharmacists and patients in BC.Methods:In the quantitative component of this mixed-methods study, we examined ulipristal acetate use from September 2015 to December 2018 using a database that captures all outpatient prescription dispensations in BC (PharmaNet) and another capturing market sales numbers for all oral emergency contraception in BC (IQVIA). We analyzed the quantitative data descriptively. We conducted semistructured interviews from August to November 2019, exploring barriers and facilitators affecting the use of ulipristal acetate. We performed iterative qualitative data collection and thematic analysis guided by Michie’s Theoretical Domains Framework.Results:Over the 3-year study period, 318 patients filled 368 prescriptions for ulipristal acetate. Use of this agent increased between 2015 and 2018. However, levonorgestrel use by sales (range 118 897–129 478 units/yr) was substantially higher than use of ulipristal acetate (range 128–389 units/yr). In the 39 interviews we conducted, from the perspectives of 12 patients, 12 community pharmacists, and 15 prescribers, we identified the following themes and respective theoretical domains as barriers to access: low awareness of ulipristal acetate (knowledge), beliefs and experiences related to shame and stigma (beliefs about consequences), and multiple health system barriers (reinforcement).Interpretation:Use of ulipristal acetate in BC was low compared with use of levonorgestrel emergency contraception; lack of knowledge, beliefs about consequences and health system barriers may be important impediments to expanding use of ulipristal acetate. These findings illuminate potential factors to explain low use of this agent and point to the need for additional strategies to support implementation.