Abstract
After its introduction in 2002, the transdermal contraceptive patch became one of the fastest growing birth control options in the United States (Fig. 1). Like combination oral contraceptives (OCs), the contraceptive patch is effective and rapidly reversible. The patch was designed to mimic the hormonal action of a 35-μg OC and carries many of the same advantages and disadvantages. It is expected that the patch will have many of the same contraceptive and non-contraceptive benefits associated with OCs. The biggest advantage of the patch is its once-a-week administration. The most common side effects are application site reaction, breast discomfort, nausea, and headaches (1). Recently, the package insert has been changed to include a statement that patch users are exposed to about 60% more estrogen than those using a typical oral contraceptive pill containing estrogen.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Audet MC, Moreau M, Koltun WE, et al. for the ORTHO EVRA/EVRA 004 study Group. (2001) Evaluation of contraceptive efficacy and cycle control of a trandermal contraceptive patch vs an oral contraceptive: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 285:2347–2354.
White T, Jain JK, Stanczyk FZ. (2005) Effect of oral versus transdermal contraceptives on androgenic markers. Am J Obstet Gynecol 192:2055–2059.
Mishell DR Jr, Kletzky O A, Brenner PF, et al. (1978) The effect of contraceptive steroids on hypothalamic-pituitary function. Am J Obstet Gynecol 130:817–821.
Burkman RT. (2002) The transdermal contraceptive patch: a new approach to hormonal contraception. Int J Fertil Womens Med 47:69–76.
Potter L, Oakley D, de Leon-Wong E, Canamar R. (1996) Measuring compliance among oral contraceptive users. Fam Plann Perspect 28:154–158.
Archer DF, Cullins V, Creasy GW, Fisher AC. (2004) The impact of improved compliance with a weekly contraceptive transdermal system (Ortho Evra™) on contraceptive efficacy. Contraception 69:189–195.
Anderson FD. (1992) Selectivity and minimal androgenicity of norgestimate in monophasic and triphasic oral contraceptives. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scan 156:15–21.
World Health Organization. (1998) Cardiovascular disease and steroid hormone contraception, report of a WHO Scientific Group. WHO Technical Report Series no. 877, Geneva, Switzerland.
Pettit DB, Sidney S, Bernstein A, et al. (1996) Stroke in users of low-dose oral contraceptives. N Engl J Med 335:8–15.
Back DJ, Breckenridge AM, Crawford FE, et al. (1980) The effects of rifampicin on the phrmacokinetics of ethinylestradiol in women. Contraception 21:135–143.
Ortho-McNeil Pharmaceutical. Ortho Evra. Available from: http://www.orthoevra.com. Accessed: March 2006.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2006 Humana Press Inc., Totowa, NJ
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Shoupe, D. (2006). Contraceptive Patch. In: Shoupe, D., Kjos, S.L. (eds) The Handbook of Contraception. Current Clinical Practice. Humana Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-59745-150-5_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-59745-150-5_5
Publisher Name: Humana Press
Print ISBN: 978-1-58829-599-6
Online ISBN: 978-1-59745-150-5
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)