Efectos adversos y motivos de retiro de implante subdérmico Jadelle® en usuarias de Policlínica de salud Sexual y Reproductiva del Hospital de Clínicas en período junio 2015- diciembre 2017 / Adverse effects and reasons of remove of subdermico implant Jadelle® in users of Sexual and Reproductive Health Clinics of Hospital de Clinicas in period june 2015-december 2017

INTRODUCCIÓN: La anticoncepción hormonal, a través de implantes subdérmicos, es uno de los métodos anticonceptivos reversibles de larga duración más eficaces en la actualidad que está disponible en nuestro país en forma gratuita en el sistema público. OBJETIVO: Reconocer los efectos adversos y los motivos de retiro del Implante Jadelle® en usuarias del Hospital de Clínicas, así como evaluar la información recibida por las usuarias al momento de la colocación. MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS: Un total de 160 pacientes participaron en el estudio a través de una encuesta previo consentimiento informado. Se utilizó la estadística descriptiva en números absolutos y porcentuales. Resultados: Previo al uso, recibieron información sobre los probables efectos adversos del método el 83% de ellas, y acerca de la efectividad del método el 89 %. En cuanto a efectos adversos los presentaron el 80,6% de las usuarias, siendo la irregularidad de la menstruación la causa más frecuente constituyendo un 61%. CONCLUSIONES: Es alta la frecuencia de pacientes que presentan efectos adversos y que solicitan retiro del implante antes del tiempo a causa de ello, 35% de las usuarias, siendo el principal motivo la irregularidad menstrual en un 43% de los casos. Es recomendable realizar un correcto asesoramiento previo a la colocación e incentivar a las pacientes a concurrir a los controles médicos, luego de la colocación, para brindar asesoramiento y tratamiento si se presentara algún efecto adverso, con el fin de obtener una mejor continuidad de uso del método.

INTRODUCTION: Hormonal contraception, through subdermal implants, is one of the most effective long active reversal contraceptive methods currently available in our country for free in the public system. OBJETIVE: Recognize the adverse effects and the reasons for its withdrawal in users of the Hospital de Clínicas as well as to evaluate the information received by the users at the time of placement. METHODOLOGY: A total of 160 patients participated in the work with prior informed consent through a survey. Descriptive statistics were used in absolute and percentage numbers. They received information on the probable adverse effects of the 83% pre-use method, about the effectiveness of the 89% method. RESULTS: Regarding adverse effects, they were present in 80.6% of the users; the being irregularity of menstruation is the most frequent, constituting 61%. Concluding that the frequency of patients presenting with adverse effects and requesting removal of the implant before the time is high because of it, 35% of the users who requested removal menstrual irregularities were the main reason for 43% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: It is advisable to make a correct advice prior to placement and encourage patients to attend medical controls, after placement, to provide advice and treatment if any adverse effect occurs, in order to give better use in terms of method time.

Reasons for Third Molars Extraction by Different Health Care Providers

Background: Third molars extraction is one of the most common surgical procedures in daily dental practice.However, the reasons for extraction varies in the literature. Objectives: The primary objective of this study wasto investigate the reasons for the extraction of third molars. The secondary objectives were to evaluate if patientand dentist- related factors affect the reasons for extraction. Methodology: A questionnaire was completed byhealth care providers in four dental centers in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. A total of 195 patients (118 females and 77males), who had their third molars extracted (n=227) were included in this study. Statistical analysis wasperformed using Fisher’s exact test. Results: Caries (42.3%) and prophylaxis (39.2%) were the most commonreasons for the extraction of third molars. Extraction for prophylactic reasons was significantly higher amongfemale patients and patients younger than 40 years old (p<0.01 and p<0.05, respectively). Furthermore, thedecision to extract for prophylactic reasons was significantly higher among specialists or consultants ascompared to students, interns or residents (74.0% vs. 26.0%; p<0.001). No difference was found betweenmaxillary and mandibular third molars extraction. Conclusion: This study identified caries and prophylaxis asthe most common causes of third molars extraction. It was also found that patients' age, gender, as well as dentists'qualification were factors influencing the reasons for extraction.