Advertisement

Long-Acting Reversible Contraception, Condom Use, and Sexually Transmitted Infections: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Published:September 16, 2021DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2021.04.032

      Introduction

      Given mixed findings regarding the relationship between long-acting reversible contraception and condom use, this systematic review and meta-analysis synthesizes studies comparing sexually transmitted infection‒related outcomes between users of long-acting reversible contraception (intrauterine devices, implants) and users of moderately effective contraceptive methods (oral contraceptives, injectables, patches, rings).

      Methods

      MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Global Health, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, and Scopus were searched for articles published between January 1990 and July 2018. Eligible studies included those that (1) were published in the English language, (2) were published in a peer-reviewed journal, (3) reported empirical, quantitative analyses, and (4) compared at least 1 outcome of interest (condom use, sexual behaviors other than condom use, sexually transmitted infection‒related service receipt, or sexually transmitted infections/HIV) between users of long-acting reversible contraception and users of moderately effective methods. In 2020, pooled ORs were calculated for condom use, chlamydia/gonorrhea infection, and trichomoniasis infection; findings for other outcomes were synthesized qualitatively. The protocol is registered on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42018109489).

      Results

      A total of 33 studies were included. Long-acting reversible contraception users had decreased odds of using condoms compared with oral contraceptive users (OR=0.43, 95% CI=0.30, 0.63) and injectable, patch, or ring users (OR=0.58, 95% CI=0.48, 0.71); this association remained when limited to adolescents and young adults only. Findings related to multiple sex partners were mixed, and only 2 studies examined sexually transmitted infection testing, reporting mainly null findings. Pooled estimates for chlamydia and/or gonorrhea were null, but long-acting reversible contraception users had increased odds of trichomoniasis infection compared with oral contraceptive users (OR=2.01, 95% CI=1.11, 3.62).

      Discussion

      Promoting condom use specifically for sexually transmitted infection prevention may be particularly important among long-acting reversible contraception users at risk for sexually transmitted infections, including adolescents and young adults.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to American Journal of Preventive Medicine
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      REFERENCES

        • Bearak J
        • Popinchalk A
        • Alkema L
        • Sedgh G.
        Global, regional, and subregional trends in unintended pregnancy and its outcomes from 1990 to 2014: estimates from a Bayesian hierarchical model.
        Lancet Glob Health. 2018; 6: e380-e389https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(18)30029-9
        • Trussel J
        • Aiken ARA
        • Micks E
        • Guthrie KA.
        • et al.
        Efficacy, safety, and personal considerations.
        in: Hatcher RA Nelson AL Trussell J Contraceptive Technology. Ayer Company Publishers, Inc., New York, NY2018
        • Ricketts S
        • Klingler G
        • Schwalberg R
        Game change in Colorado: widespread use of long-acting reversible contraceptives and rapid decline in births among young, low-income women.
        Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2014; 46: 125-132https://doi.org/10.1363/46e1714
        • Secura GM
        • Madden T
        • McNicholas C
        • et al.
        Provision of no-cost, long-acting contraception and teenage pregnancy.
        N Engl J Med. 2015; 371: 1316-1323https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1400506
        • Harper CC
        • Rocca CH
        • Thompson KM
        • et al.
        Reductions in pregnancy rates in the USA with long-acting reversible contraception: a cluster randomised trial.
        Lancet. 2015; 386: 562-568https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(14)62460-0
        • Finer LB
        • Zolna MR.
        Declines in unintended pregnancy in the United States, 2008-2011.
        N Engl J Med. 2016; 374: 843-852https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMsa1506575
        • Walsh-Buhi ER
        • Helmy HL.
        Trends in long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARC) use, LARC use predictors, and dual-method use among a national sample of college women.
        J Am Coll Health. 2018; 66: 225-236https://doi.org/10.1080/07448481.2017.1399397
        • Kann L
        • McManus T
        • Harris WA
        • et al.
        Youth risk behavior surveillance - United States, 2017.
        MMWR Surveill Summ. 2018; 67: 1-114https://doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.ss6708a1
        • Adedini SA
        • Omisakin OA
        • Somefun OD.
        Trends, patterns and determinants of long-acting reversible methods of contraception among women in sub-Saharan Africa.
        PLoS One. 2019; 14e0217574https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0217574
        • Martinez GM
        • Abma JC.
        Sexual activity and contraceptive use among teenagers aged 15-19 in the United States, 2015-2017.
        NCHS Data Brief. 2020; : 1-8
        • Rowley J
        • Vander Hoorn S
        • Korenromp E
        • et al.
        Chlamydia, gonorrhoea, trichomoniasis and syphilis: global prevalence and incidence estimates, 2016.
        Bull World Health Organ. 2019; 97: 548-562Phttps://doi.org/10.2471/BLT.18.228486
        • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
        Sexually Transmitted Disease Surveillance 2019. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Atlanta, GA2021 (Updated April 13Accessed XXX)
        • Gavin L
        • Moskosky S
        • Carter M
        • et al.
        Providing quality family planning services: recommendations of CDC and the U.S. Office of Population Affairs.
        MMWR Recomm Rep. 2014; 63: 1-54
        • Menon S
        • Committee on Adolescence
        Long-acting reversible contraception: specific issues for adolescents.
        Pediatrics. 2020; 146e2020007252https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2020-007252
        • Grubb LK
        • Committee on Adolescence
        Barrier protection use by adolescents during sexual activity.
        Pediatrics. 2020; 146e2020007245https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2020-007245
        • Tyler CP
        • Whiteman MK
        • Kraft JM
        • et al.
        Dual use of condoms with other contraceptive methods among adolescents and young women in the United States.
        J Adolesc Health. 2014; 54: 169-175https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2013.07.042
      1. Farr SL, Kraft JM, Warner L, Anderson JE, Jamieson DJ. The integration of STD/HIV services with contraceptive services for young women in the United States. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009;201(2):142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2009.04.018.

      2. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. STDs and HIV – CDC fact sheet. https://www.cdc.gov/std/hiv/stdfact-std-hiv-detailed.htm. Published 2020. Accessed May 12, 2021.

        • Krist AH
        • Davidson KW
        • et al.
        • U.S. Preventive Services Task Force
        Behavioral counseling interventions to prevent sexually transmitted infections: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.
        JAMA. 2020; 324: 674-681https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2020.13095
        • Steiner RJ
        • Liddon N
        • Swartzendruber AL
        • Pazol K
        • Sales JM.
        Moving the message beyond the methods: toward integration of unintended pregnancy and sexually transmitted infection/HIV prevention.
        Am J Prev Med. 2018; 54: 440-443https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2017.10.022
        • Pazol K
        • Kramer MR
        • Hogue CJ.
        Condoms for dual protection: patterns of use with highly effective contraceptive methods.
        Public Health Rep. 2010; 125: 208-217https://doi.org/10.1177/003335491012500209
        • Steiner RJ
        • Liddon N
        • Swartzendruber AL
        • Rasberry CN
        • Sales JM.
        Long-acting reversible contraception and condom use among female U.S. high school students: implications for sexually transmitted infection prevention.
        JAMA Pediatr. 2016; 170: 428-434https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2016.0007
        • Darney PD
        • Callegari LS
        • Swift A
        • Atkinson ES
        • Robert AM.
        Condom practices of urban teens using Norplant contraceptive implants, oral contraceptives, and condoms for contraception.
        Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1999; 180: 929-937https://doi.org/10.1016/s0002-9378(99)70664-2
        • Diaz T
        • Schable B
        • Chu SY.
        Relationship between use of condoms and other forms of contraception among human immunodeficiency virus-infected women.
        Obstet Gynecol. 1995; 86: 277-282https://doi.org/10.1016/0029-7844(95)00144-g
        • Berenson AB
        • Wiemann CM
        • Rickerr VI
        • McCombs SL.
        Contraceptive outcomes among adolescents prescribed Norplant implants versus oral contraceptives after one year of use.
        Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1997; 176: 586-592https://doi.org/10.1016/s0002-9378(97)70552-0
        • Hall KS
        • Patton EW
        • Crissman HP
        • Zochowski MK
        • Dalton VK.
        A population-based study of U.S. women's preferred versus usual sources of reproductive health care.
        Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015; 213: 352.e1-352.e14https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2015.04.025
        • Moher D
        • Liberati A
        • Tetzlaff J
        • Altman DG
        • PRISMA Group
        Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: the PRISMA statement.
        PLoS Med. 2009; 6e1000097https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097
        • Stroup DF
        • Berlin JA
        • Morton SC
        • et al.
        Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting.
        JAMA. 2000; 283: 2008-2012https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.283.15.2008
        • Fethers KA
        • Fairley CK
        • Hocking JS
        • Gurrin LC
        • Bradshaw CS.
        Sexual risk factors and bacterial vaginosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
        Clin Infect Dis. 2008; 47: 1426-1435https://doi.org/10.1086/592974
        • Manhart LE
        • Koutsky LA.
        Do condoms prevent genital HPV infection, external genital warts, or cervical neoplasia? A meta-analysis.
        Sex Transm Dis. 2002; 29: 725-735https://doi.org/10.1097/00007435-200211000-00018
        • Polis CB
        • Curtis KM.
        Use of hormonal contraceptives and HIV acquisition in women: a systematic review of the epidemiological evidence.
        Lancet Infect Dis. 2013; 13: 797-808https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(13)70155-5
      3. Wells GA, Shea B, O'Connell D, et al. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-analyses. Ottawa, Canada: The Ottawa Hospital. http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp. Accessed May 14, 2021.

        • Rotenstein LS
        • Ramos MA
        • Torre M
        • et al.
        Prevalence of depression, depressive symptoms, and suicidal ideation among medical students: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
        JAMA. 2016; 316: 2214-2236https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2016.17324
        • Reda SF
        • Reda SM
        • Thomson WM
        • Schwendicke F.
        Inequality in utilization of dental services: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
        Am J Public Health. 2018; 108: e1-e7https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2017.304180
        • Fonner VA
        • Kennedy CE
        • O'Reilly KR
        • Sweat MD
        Systematic assessment of condom use measurement in evaluation of HIV prevention interventions: need for standardization of measures.
        AIDS Behav. 2014; 18: 2374-2386https://doi.org/10.1007/s10461-013-0655-1
      4. Roan S. Maker of Norplant decides to take product off market. Los Angeles Times. https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2002-aug-05-he-norplant5-story.html. Published 2002. Accessed July 9, 2021.

        • Avonts D
        • Sercu M
        • Heyerick P
        • Vandermeeren I
        • Meheus A
        • Piot P.
        Incidence of uncomplicated genital infections in women using oral contraception or an intrauterine device: a prospective study.
        Sex Transm Dis. 1990; 17: 23-29https://doi.org/10.1097/00007435-199001000-00006
        • Bastow B
        • Sheeder J
        • Guiahi M
        • Teal S.
        Condom use in adolescents and young women following initiation of long- or short-acting contraceptive methods.
        Contraception. 2018; 97: 70-75https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2017.10.002
        • Berenson AB
        • Wiemann CM.
        Use of levonorgestrel implants versus oral contraceptives in adolescence: a case-control study.
        Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1995; 172: 1128-1137https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9378(95)91471-4
        • Bernard C
        • Zhao Q
        • Peipert JF.
        Dual method use among long-acting reversible contraceptive users.
        Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2018; 23: 97-104https://doi.org/10.1080/13625187.2018.1445850
        • Brahmbhatt H
        • Musoke R
        • Makumbi F
        • et al.
        Trichomonas vaginalis incidence associated with hormonal contraceptive use and HIV infection among women in Rakai, Uganda.
        J Sex Transm Dis. 2014; 2014916597https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/916597
        • Brooks JP
        • Edwards DJ
        • Blithe DL
        • et al.
        Effects of combined oral contraceptives, depot medroxyprogesterone acetate and the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system on the vaginal microbiome.
        Contraception. 2017; 95: 405-413https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2016.11.006
        • Ceruti M
        • Canestrelli M
        • Condemi V
        • et al.
        Methods of contraception and rates of genital infections.
        Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol. 1994; 21: 119-123
        • Cropsey KL
        • Matthews C
        • Campbel S
        • Ivey S
        • Adawadkar S.
        Long-term, reversible contraception use among high-risk women treated in a university-based gynecology clinic: comparison between IUD and Depo-Provera.
        J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2010; 19: 349-353https://doi.org/10.1089/jwh.2009.1518
        • Cushman LF
        • Romero D
        • Kalmuss D
        • Davidson AR
        • Heartwell S
        • Rulin M.
        Condom use among women choosing long-term hormonal contraception.
        Fam Plann Perspect. 1998; 30: 240-243https://doi.org/10.2307/2991611
        • Eisenberg DL
        • Allsworth JE
        • Zhao Q
        • Peipert JF.
        Correlates of dual-method contraceptive use: an analysis of the National Survey of Family Growth (2006-2008).
        Infect Dis Obstet Gynecol. 2012; 2012717163https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/717163
        • El Ayadi AM
        • Rocca CH
        • Kohn JE
        • et al.
        The impact of an IUD and implant intervention on dual method use among young women: results from a cluster randomized trial.
        Prev Med. 2017; 94: 1-6https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2016.10.015
        • Feldblum PJ
        • Caraway J
        • Bahamondes L
        • et al.
        Randomized assignment to copper IUD or depot-medroxyprogesterone acetate: feasibility of enrollment, continuation and disease ascertainment.
        Contraception. 2005; 72: 187-191https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2005.03.006
        • Gavric-Lovrec V
        • Takac I.
        Use of various contraceptives and human papillomavirus 16 and 18 infections in women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia.
        Int J STD AIDS. 2010; 21: 424-427https://doi.org/10.1258/ijsa.2010.009580
        • Gosavi A
        • Ma Y
        • Wong H
        • Singh K.
        Knowledge and factors determining choice of contraception among Singaporean women.
        Singapore Med J. 2016; 57: 610-615https://doi.org/10.11622/smedj.2015181
        • Guerreiro D
        • Gigante MA
        • Teles LC.
        Sexually transmitted diseases and reproductive tract infections among contraceptive users.
        Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 1998; 63: S167-S173https://doi.org/10.1016/s0020-7292(98)00201-x
        • Jenab A
        • Roghanian R
        • Golbang N
        • Golbang P
        • Chamani-Tabriz L.
        Comparison of three methods of DNA extraction in endocervical specimens for Chlamydia trachomatis infection by spectrophotometry, agarose gel, and PCR.
        Arch Immunol Ther Exp. 2010; 58: 227-234https://doi.org/10.1007/s00005-010-0076-z
        • Kapiga SH
        • Shao JF
        • Lwihula GK
        • Hunter DJ.
        Risk factors for HIV infection among women in Dar-es-Salaam, Tanzania.
        J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr (1988). 1994; 7: 301-309https://doi.org/10.1097/00002030-199801000-00009
        • Kleinschmidt I
        • Maggwa BN
        • Smit J
        • Beksinska ME
        • Rees H.
        Dual protection in sexually active women.
        S Afr Med J. 2003; 93: 854-857
        • Lan PT
        • Lundborg CS
        • Phuc HD
        • et al.
        Reproductive tract infections including sexually transmitted infections: a population-based study of women of reproductive age in a rural district of Vietnam.
        Sex Transm Infect. 2008; 84: 126-132https://doi.org/10.1136/sti.2007.027821
        • Porras C
        • Safaeian M
        • González P
        • et al.
        Epidemiology of genital Chlamydia trachomatis infection among young women in Costa Rica.
        Sex Transm Dis. 2008; 35: 461-468https://doi.org/10.1097/OLQ.0b013e3181644b4c
        • Rezk M
        • Sayyed T
        • Masood A
        • Dawood R.
        Risk of bacterial vaginosis, Trichomonas vaginalis and Candida albicans infection among new users of combined hormonal contraception vs LNG-IUS.
        Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2017; 22: 344-348https://doi.org/10.1080/13625187.2017.1365835
        • Rose SB
        • Garrett SM
        • Stanley J
        • Pullon SRH.
        Chlamydia testing and diagnosis following initiation of long-acting reversible contraception: a retrospective cohort study.
        Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2017; 57: 665-675https://doi.org/10.1111/ajo.12685
        • Schoenbaum EE
        • Chang CJ
        • Moore J
        • et al.
        Use of condoms and other contraceptive methods by HIV-infected and at-risk women.
        Clin J Womens Health. 2001; 1: 115-122https://doi.org/10.1053/cjwh.2001.25543
        • Sharief M.
        Ge nital infections among women using various contraceptive methods in Basra, Iraq.
        East Mediterr Health J. 1998; 4: 487-492https://doi.org/10.26719/1998.4.3.487
        • Shrikhande SN
        • Joshi SG
        • Zodpey SP
        • Saoji AM.
        Chlamydia trachomatis in pelvic inflammatory disease.
        Indian J Pathol Microbiol. 1995; 38: 181-184
        • Steiner RJ
        • Pazol K
        • Swartzendruber A
        • et al.
        Use of long-acting reversible contraception among adolescent and young adult women and receipt of sexually transmitted infection/human immunodeficiency virus-related services.
        J Adolesc Health. 2018; 62: 417-423https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2017.10.017
        • Suhonen S
        • Haukkamaa M
        • Jakobsson T
        • Rauramo I.
        Clinical performance of a levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system and oral contraceptives in young nulliparous women: a comparative study.
        Contraception. 2004; 69: 407-412https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2003.11.008
        • Xu X
        • Macaluso M
        • Frost J
        • Anderson JE
        • Curtis K
        • Grosse SD.
        Characteristics of users of intrauterine devices and other reversible contraceptive methods in the United States.
        Fertil Steril. 2011; 96: 1138-1144https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.08.019
        • McCarthy KJ
        • Gollub EL
        • Ralph L
        • van de Wijgert J
        • Jones HE.
        Hormonal contraceptives and the acquisition of sexually transmitted infections: an updated systematic review.
        Sex Transm Dis. 2019; 46: 290-296https://doi.org/10.1097/OLQ.0000000000000975
        • Mohllajee AP
        • Curtis KM
        • Martins SL
        • Peterson HB.
        Hormonal contraceptive use and risk of sexually transmitted infections: a systematic review.
        Contraception. 2006; 73: 154-165https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2005.08.012
        • Morrison CS
        • Turner AN
        • Jones LB.
        Highly effective contraception and acquisition of HIV and other sexually transmitted infections.
        Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2009; 23: 263-284https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2008.11.004
        • Soares LC
        • Braz FLTA
        • Araújo AR
        • Oliveira MAP.
        Association of sexually transmitted diseases with cervical ectopy: a systematic review.
        Sex Transm Dis. 2019; 46: 452-457https://doi.org/10.1097/OLQ.0000000000000992
        • Derefinko KJ
        • Ashby S
        • Hayes T
        • et al.
        Sexually transmitted infections and contraceptive use in adolescents.
        Am J Prev Med. 2020; 58: 536-546https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2019.11.012
        • Mendoza RM
        • Garbers S
        • Lin S
        • Stockwell MS
        • Warren M
        • Gold MA.
        Chlamydia infection among adolescent long-acting reversible contraceptive and shorter-acting hormonal contraceptive users receiving services at New York City school-based health centers.
        J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2020; 33: 53-57https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpag.2019.09.006
        • LeFevre ML
        Screening for chlamydia and gonorrhea: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement.
        Ann Intern Med. 2014; 161: 902-910https://doi.org/10.7326/M14-1981
        • Kortsmit K
        • Williams L
        • Pazol K
        • et al.
        Condom use with long-acting reversible contraception vs non-long-acting reversible contraception hormonal methods among postpartum adolescents.
        JAMA Pediatr. 2019; 173: 663-670https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2019.1136
        • Nguyen J
        • Williams H
        • McNamee K
        • Shafeeu N
        • Vaisey A
        • Hocking J.
        Condom use among young women in Australia using long-acting reversible contraceptives or other hormonal contraceptives.
        Sex Health. 2019; 16: 574-579https://doi.org/10.1071/SH19045
        • Rattray C
        • Wiener J
        • Legardy-Williams J
        • et al.
        Effects of initiating a contraceptive implant on subsequent condom use: a randomized controlled trial.
        Contraception. 2015; 92: 560-566https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2015.06.009
        • Lemoine J
        • Teal SB
        • Peters M
        • Guiahi M.
        Motivating factors for dual-method contraceptive use among adolescents and young women: a qualitative investigation.
        Contraception. 2017; 96: 352-356https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2017.06.011
        • Steiner RJ
        • Swartzendruber A
        • Cushing K
        • et al.
        Being on the safe side: a qualitative study of condom use motivations according to contraceptive type among adolescents in Atlanta, Georgia.
        J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2019; 32: 388-394https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpag.2019.02.122
        • Raidoo S
        • Tschann M
        • Elia J
        • Kaneshiro B
        • Soon R.
        Dual-method contraception among adolescents and young people: are long-acting reversible contraception users different? A qualitative study.
        J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2020; 33: 45-52https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpag.2019.09.008
        • Guilamo-Ramos V
        • Reading M
        • Bowman AS
        • Perlman DC
        • Barrett S.
        Multipurpose prevention technologies: a global sexual and reproductive health priority.
        J Assoc Nurses AIDS Care. 2018; 29: 6-9https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jana.2017.06.003