Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF ) Freely available
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (7)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Glasier, A.F.
Right arrow Articles by Baird, D.T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Glasier, A.F.
Right arrow Articles by Baird, D.T.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Human Reproduction, Vol. 14, No. 12, 3018-3022, December 1999
© 1999 European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology

An international study on the acceptability of a once-a-month pill

A.F. Glasier1,5, K.B. Smith1, L. Cheng2, P.C. Ho3, Z. van der Spuy4 and D.T. Baird1

1 Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK 2 Shanghai Institute of Family Planning Technical Instruction, Shanghai, People's Republic of China, 3 Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, People's Republic of China, and 4 Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Cape Town, South Africa

Totals of 450 women attending family planning clinics in Hong Kong, Shanghai and Edinburgh, and 468 in Cape Town, completed a questionnaire designed to seek their views on a contraceptive pill which would be taken only once each month. At least two-thirds of the women in all centres liked the idea of a once-a-month pill. In Hong Kong, Cape Town and Edinburgh, women preferred a pill which inhibited ovulation to one which inhibited implantation, while in all centres a pill which worked after implantation (early menstrual inducer) was considered unacceptable by over half the women. A pill which was taken after a missed menstrual period was considered preferable in all centres, perhaps because it would not be used every month but rather only if pregnancy had occurred. No demographic characteristics, contraceptive experiences or beliefs were consistently correlated with attitudes towards a once-a-month pill, except that women who would not consider having an abortion were more likely to dislike a method that either prevented, or worked after, implantation. A once-a-month pill is now technically possible, although the major drawback is the need to determine when it should be taken. It is reassuring that many women from a variety of different cultures and with widely different experiences, would find this an attractive approach to contraception.

Key words: contraception/contraceptive pill/mifepristone

5 To whom correspondence should be addressed at: The Dean Terrace Centre, Edinburgh, Scotland


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 The Obstetrician and GynaecologistHome page
C. F Fleming
Long-acting reversible contraceptives
Obstet Gynaecol (Lond), April 1, 2009; 11(2): 83 - 88.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J AndrolHome page
M. C. Meriggiola, T. M.M. Farley, and M. T. Mbizvo
A Review of Androgen-Progestin Regimens for Male Contraception
J Androl, July 1, 2003; 24(4): 466 - 483.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
D. K. Hapangama, A. Brown, A. F. Glasier, and D. T. Baird
Feasibility of administering mifepristone as a once a month contraceptive pill
Hum. Reprod., June 1, 2001; 16(6): 1145 - 1150.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.