Cost-benefit analysis of enhancing the uptake of long-acting reversible contraception in Australia.

Objective Long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) is the most effective form of reversible contraception, but its use in Australia is low compared with other countries. The aim of this study was to evaluate the economic effect of an increase in LARC uptake to international rates. Methods An economic model was designed to assess two scenarios, namely increasing the current rate of LARC uptake of 12.5% to the international benchmark of 14.8% among: (1) women currently using the oral contraceptive pill (OCP); and (2) women at risk of pregnancy and not using contraception. Model inputs included cost of contraceptive methods, discontinuation rates and abortion and miscarriage costs associated with unintended pregnancies. Results Women who switch from an OCP to LARC would save A$114-157 per year. Those not currently using any contraception who adopt LARC would incur costs of A$36-194 per year, but would reap savings from the reduction in unintended pregnancies. Over 5 years there would be a net saving of A$74.4 million for Scenario 1 and A$2.4 million for Scenario 2. Conclusion Greater use of LARC would result in a net gain in economic benefits to Australia. These benefits are largely driven by women switching from an OCP to LARC who have reduced costs, as well as women wishing to avoid pregnancy who choose to use LARC rather than no method. This evidence will support women making an informed contraceptive choice and policy makers in increasing the accessibility of LARC. What is known about the topic? LARC is the most effective form of reversible contraception, but uptake in Australia is relatively low. What does this paper add? There are economic benefits to society for women who switch from an OCP to LARC, as well as for women who switch from no contraception to LARC. What are the implications for practitioners? The findings of this study will support women in making an informed contraceptive choice and policy makers in increasing the accessibility of LARC.

Ulipristal acetate for pre-operative management of uterine fibroids: Modeling outcomes and costs.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the pharmacoeconomic profile in Italy of preoperative treatment with ulipristal acetate at the dose of 5 mg/day for 13 weeks in comparison with placebo prior to surgical management of symptomatic uterine fibroids. STUDY DESIGN: The pharmacoeconomic analysis was based on the calculation of incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Effectiveness data were derived from the randomized-controlled trial PEARL-1, whilst costs data were retrieved from the published literature. A Markov model was employed to simulate the pattern of costs and two univariate sensitivity analyses tested the robustness of the results. RESULTS: In comparison with placebo, ulipristal acetate 5 mg for presurgical therapy was estimated to be associated with an incremental cost of €351 per patient. Costs per patient were €3836 for ulipristal acetate vs €3485 for placebo. The incremental effectiveness was 0.01931 QALYs per patient (around 7 quality-adjusted days per patient). Hence, the cost effectiveness ratio was calculated to be €18,177 per QALY gained. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative use of ulipristal acetate 5 mg in patients with uterine fibroids has a favourable pharmacoeconomic profile.

Prescription Birth Control Access Among U.S. Women at Risk of Unintended Pregnancy.

BACKGROUND: Access to contraception is a vital component of preventing unintended pregnancies. This study was conducted to assess the prevalence of and factors associated with U.S. women's difficulty accessing prescription contraception (pill, patch, or ring). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a nationally representative survey of adult women at risk of unintended pregnancy (aged 18-44, not pregnant or seeking pregnancy, sexually active, not sterilized) using a probability-based web panel. In November to December 2011, 2046 women completed the survey. Weighted proportions were calculated and logistic regression was used to identify covariates associated with difficulty obtaining or refilling prescription contraception. RESULTS: A total of 1385 (68%) women had ever tried to get a prescription for hormonal contraception. Among this population, 29% reported ever having problems obtaining a prescription or refills. In multivariable regression, uninsured (vs. privately insured) and Spanish-speaking (vs. English-speaking) women were significantly more likely to report difficulties; women with a high school degree and those with some college (vs. a college degree or higher) were significantly less likely to report difficulty. Difficulties included cost barriers or lack of insurance (14%), challenges obtaining an appointment or getting to a clinic (13%), the clinician requiring a clinic visit, exam, or Pap smear (13%), not having a regular doctor/clinic (10%), difficulty accessing a pharmacy (4%), and other reasons (4%). CONCLUSIONS: One-third of adult U.S. women who have ever tried to obtain prescription contraception reported access barriers. While the Affordable Care Act may resolve some of these issues, these data indicate that additional factors may still need to be addressed.

The Cost-Effectiveness of Emergency Hormonal Contraception with Ulipristal Acetate versus Levonorgestrel for Minors in France.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of ulipristal acetate and levonorgestrel in minors in France, and analyze whether it is worthwhile to provide ulipristal acetate to minors free of charge. METHODS: The cost-effectiveness of two emergency contraceptive methods was compared based on a decision-analytical model. Pregnancy rates, outcomes of unintended pregnancies, and resource utilization were derived from the literature. Resources and their costs were considered until termination or a few days after delivery. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: The cost of an unintended pregnancy in a French minor is estimated to be 1,630 € (range 1,330 € - 1,803 €). Almost 4 million € (3.1 € - 13.7 € million) in unintended pregnancy spending in 2010 could have been saved by the use of ulipristal acetate instead of levonorgestrel. The incremental cost of ulipristal acetate compared to levonorgestrel is 3.30 € per intake, or 418 € per pregnancy avoided (intake within 72 hours). In the intake within 24 hours subgroup, ulipristal acetate was found to be more efficacious at a lower cost compared to levonorgestrel. CONCLUSIONS: Ulipristal acetate dominates levonorgestrel when taken within 24 hours after unprotected intercourse, i.e., it is more effective at a lower cost. When taken within 72 hours, ulipristal acetate is a cost- effective alternative to levonorgestrel, given that the cost of avoiding an additional pregnancy with ulipristal acetate is less than the average cost of these pregnancies. In the light of these findings, it is worthwhile to provide free access to minors.

Costes de la anticoncepción hormonal combinada en España: ¿hay algún método más coste-efectivo? / Cost-effectiveness of combined hormonal contraception in Spain: Which is the most cost-effective method?

Objetivo: Evaluar el coste-efectividad de diferentes métodos anticonceptivos hormonales combinados. Material y método: Estudio de farmacoeconomía utilizando un modelo de Markov sobre los costes de 3 métodos anticonceptivos hormonales combinados: un anticonceptivo oral financiado, un parche transdérmico y un anillo vaginal. Resultados: El coste total para el Sistema Nacional de Salud, teniendo en cuenta todas las mujeres en edad fértil que utilizan anticoncepción hormonal combinada, sería de 410.122.928 euros en el caso del anticonceptivo oral financiado, de 296.961.568 euros en el caso del parche y de 295.380.316 euros en el caso del anillo vaginal. Para las mujeres los costes serían de 106.164.890 euros, 521.386.383 y 534.474.699 euros respectivamente. Conclusión: Desde la perspectiva del Sistema Nacional de Salud el método de anticoncepción hormonal combinada más coste-efectivo es el anillo vaginal. Desde la perspectiva de las mujeres el uso del anillo vaginal les cuesta más dinero, pero se exponen menos al riesgo de un embarazo no deseado (AU)

Objective: To assess the cost-effectiveness of different combined hormonal contraceptive (CHC) methods. Material and method: A pharmacoeconomic study was conducted using a Markov model of three CHC methods: a reimbursed oral contraceptive, a contraceptive patch, and a vaginal ring. Results: The total cost to the National Health Service would be Euros 410,122,928 if all women of fertile age who employed CHC used a financed oral contraceptive, Euros 296,961,568 if they used the transdermal patch, and Euros 295,380,316 if they used the vaginal ring. For women, these costs would be Euros 106,164,890, Euros 521,386,383, and Euros 534,474,699, respectively. Conclusion: From an National Health Service perspective, the most cost-effective CHC method is the vaginal ring. For women, the vaginal ring is most expensive method, but the excess price could be balanced by a greater protection against unwanted pregnancies (AU)

The effects of contraception on female poverty.

Poverty rates are particularly high among households headed by single women, and childbirth is often the event preceding these households' poverty spells. This paper examines the relationship between legal access to the birth control pill and female poverty. We rely on exogenous cross-state variation in the year in which oral contraception became legally available to young, single women. Using census data from 1960 to 1990, we find that having legal access to the birth control pill by age 20 significantly reduces the probability that a woman is subsequently in poverty. We estimate that early legal access to oral contraception reduces female poverty by 0.5 percentage points, even when controlling for completed education, employment status, and household composition.

Association of copayment and socioeconomic status with hormonal contraceptive adherence in a female veteran population.

BACKGROUND: There are limited studies available analyzing association between copayment and hormonal contraception adherence. The study was conducted to investigate the association between copayment status and hormonal contraceptive adherence in a female veteran population when stratified by socioeconomic status. METHODS: This 4-year, retrospective, cohort study of women Veterans from the Veterans Integrated Service Network 22, a network of Veterans Affairs facilities that includes Southern California and Nevada, included patients who received a new hormonal contraceptive prescription between October 1, 2008, and September 30, 2012. Patients were split into five quintiles (one having the lowest income and five the highest) dependent on zip code-based median annual household income from the 2007-2011 American Community Survey data. Medication possession ratio difference of copayment versus no copayment group for each respective quintile was the primary outcome. Analysis was done using multiple linear regression models. RESULTS: A total of 3,622 patients met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. Over the entire population, copayment was significantly associated with reduced adherence (-0.034; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.06 to -0.008). Patients in the highest socioeconomic group, quintile five, had the largest reduction in adherence associated with having a copayment (-0.073; 95% CI, -0.129 to -0.017). Patients in the other four quintiles saw varying levels of decreased adherence respectively, although the differences did not achieve statistical significance. CONCLUSION: The association between adherence and copayment status varied by socioeconomic status. Our findings suggest that even affluent patients may be discouraged from adherence when subject to a copayment. If larger studies substantiate these findings, consideration should be given to a policy that exempts women veterans from copayments for hormonal contraceptives.

User characteristics and out-of-pocket expenditures for progestin-only versus combined oral contraceptives.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the proportion of oral contraceptive pill (OCP) users that use progestin-only pills (POPs), factors associated with POP use, and whether out-of-pocket expenditures and dispensing patterns are similar to combined oral contraceptives (COCs). STUDY DESIGN: Observational cohort using 1996-2008 Medical Expenditure Panel Surveys. RESULTS: Among all OCP users, 4% used POPs and changed little between 1996 and 2008. Women were more likely to use POPs if they received postpartum care (p<.001), had a diagnosis of hypertension (p<.001) or resided in the West (p<.01). POP users, compared to COC users, were more likely to pay $15 and more (p<.01) and less likely to obtain more than one pack per purchase (p<.001), controlling for age, race/ethnicity and insurance coverage. CONCLUSION: POP use is very low in the United States. POP users obtained fewer packs per purchase compared with COC users, suggesting that POP may be used as transitional OCPs, particularly during the postpartum period.

Estradiol valerate/dienogest: a novel combined oral contraceptive.

BACKGROUND: Estradiol valerate/dienogest (E2V/DNG) is a combined oral contraceptive (COC) with 2 new hormonal entities and a unique 4-phasic dosing regimen indicated for women to prevent pregnancy. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this article is to review the pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, clinical efficacy, tolerability, and cost of E2V/DNG. METHODS: MEDLINE (1966-June 2011) and EMBASE (1966-June 2011) were searched for original research and review articles published in the English language using the terms Natazia or Qlaira or estradiol valerate and dienogest. The reference lists of identified articles were reviewed for additional pertinent publications. Abstracts from the 2005 to 2011 American Society of Reproductive Medicine and American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists meetings were searched using the same terms. RESULTS: The search provided 56 articles that addressed the pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, clinical efficacy, and tolerability of E2V/DNG in women of reproductive age. Articles reporting efficacy or tolerability in the setting of menopause were excluded. The initial efficacy of E2V/DNG on ovulation inhibition was investigated in 2 prospective, randomized, open-label, Phase II dose-finding studies. The dose that was approved by the Food and Drug Administration resulted in 3.13% of women ovulating in the second cycle of treatment (90% CI, 0.2%-6.05%). Rate of pregnancy prevention with this agent was reported with a Pearl Index ranging from 0.73 to 1.27 (unadjusted) to 0.34 to 0.72 (adjusted for method failure only). The mean duration of withdrawal bleeding was 4.3 days (range, 4.0-4.6 days) among 2266 women receiving 13 treatment cycles. Adverse events reported in >1% of patients included abdominal pain, acne, breast pain, dysmenorrhea, emotional lability, headache, nausea, and weight increase. CONCLUSIONS: Estradiol valerate/dienogest is a new contraceptive formulation. It offers efficacy, tolerability, and an acceptable safety profile with a potentially better bleeding pattern than levonorgestrel-containing COCs. This COC may be especially useful for older women of reproductive age who are adherent to therapy and looking for shorter and/or lighter menstrual cycles. Studies will need to be performed to determine whether clinically significant differences in outcomes exist among E2V/DNG and other available COCs.

"Momma's Got the Pill": How Anthony Comstock and Griswold v. Connecticut Shaped US Childbearing.

The 1960s ushered in a new era in US demographic history characterized by significantly lower fertility rates and smaller family sizes. What catalyzed these changes remains a matter of considerable debate. This paper exploits idiosyncratic variation in the language of "Comstock" statutes, enacted in the late 1800s, to quantify the role of the birth control pill in this transition. Almost 50 years after the contraceptive pill appeared on the US market, this analysis provides new evidence that it accelerated the post-1960 decline in marital fertility.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of endometrial cancer prevention strategies for obese women.

OBJECTIVE: It is unknown whether obese women would benefit from oral contraceptives or screening as endometrial cancer prevention strategies. We estimated the net health benefits and cost-effectiveness of these strategies in a hypothetical cohort of obese women. METHODS: A Markov decision-analytic model evaluated 4 strategies: 1) no prevention (reference strategy); 2) oral contraceptive pills (OCPs) for 5 years; 3) annual screening with endometrial biopsy from age 30; 4) biennial screening from age 30. Net health benefit was life expectancy and primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Baseline and transition probabilities were obtained from published literature and the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results database, and costs were from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Sensitivity analyses were performed for uncertainty around various measures. RESULTS: Average life expectancy for all strategies ranged from 74.52 to 74.60 years. None of the strategies had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio less than $50,000 per year of life saved relative to the next best strategy. Endometrial cancer risk in obese women had to be 13 times greater than the general population risk before OCPs were a cost-effective intervention. CONCLUSION: Oral contraceptives and current screening methods are not cost-effective endometrial cancer prevention strategies for obese women. Risk factors such as morbid obesity and longstanding anovulation may define a subgroup at highest risk of endometrial cancer for whom OCPs may be a cost-effective strategy. Interventions that reduce endometrial cancer risk further or those with additional health benefits are needed in this population. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Preventing unintended pregnancy: the cost-effectiveness of three methods of emergency contraception.

OBJECTIVES: This study examined the cost-effectiveness of emergency contraceptive pills, minipills, and the copper-T intrauterine device (IUD) as emergency contraception. METHODS: Cost savings were modeled for both (1) a single contraceptive treatment following unprotected intercourse and (2) emergency contraceptive pills provided in advance. RESULTS: In a managed care (public payer) setting, a single treatment of emergency contraception after unprotected intercourse saves $142 ($54) with emergency contraceptive pills and $119 ($29) with minipills. The copper-T IUD is not cost-effective as an emergency contraceptive alone, but savings quickly accrue as use continues. Advance provision of emergency contraceptive pills to women using barrier contraceptives, spermicides, withdrawal, or periodic abstinence saves from $263 to $498 ($99 to $205) annually. CONCLUSIONS: Emergency contraception is cost-effective whether provided when the emergency arises or in advance to be used as needed. Greater use of emergency contraception could reduce the considerable medical and social costs of unintended pregnancies.

A comparative evaluation of oral contraceptive use and associated compliance issues in a rural population.

One hundred thirty-three patients were enrolled in a study designed to evaluate and compare oral contraceptive use in three rural communities. The patients averaged 31 years old (range, 13 to 49 years); 92% were white, 4.5% Hispanic, and 3% Native American. Genora, Ortho-Novum, and Triphasil were the most frequently prescribed oral contraceptives. Triphasic oral contraceptives accounted for one third (n = 64) of 203 prescriptions, and conventional monophasic preparations accounted for two thirds. Twenty percent (n = 26) of the patients studied were non-compliant. The most frequent causes of noncompliance cited were cost and inconvenience. However, generic alternatives were requested in only 43% of the cases for which generic equivalents were available. Less-expensive alternatives (eg, generic products, medroxyprogesterone acetate injection) should be advocated to deter patient noncompliance because of cost issues. Drug interactions and adverse effects were not reported in our patient population and thus did not contribute to noncompliance.

PIP: Oral contraceptives are used by 13 million women each year in the US. The cost and inconvenience of daily use, however, are cause for concern and noncompliance among users of oral contraceptives. The author examined the outpatient use of oral contraceptives and attendant factors influencing compliance and outcomes in a rural population. 133 patients of mean age 31 years, in the range of 13-49, in three rural communities, were enrolled in the study. 92% were White, 4.5% Hispanic, and 3% Native American. Genora, Ortho-Novum, and Triphasil were the most frequently prescribed oral contraceptives. Triphasic oral contraceptives comprised 64 of 203 prescriptions, while conventional monophasic preparations made up the rest. 20% of patients were noncompliant, with cost and inconvenience being the most frequently cited causes of such behavior. Generic alternatives, however, were requested in only 43% of the cases for which generic equivalents were available. The author stresses the need to advocate less expensive alternatives in the effort to deter patient noncompliance. Drug interactions and adverse effects were not reported in this population.

New progestin oral contraceptives and the female condom.

PIP: Recent advances in contraceptive technology offer US adolescent females the potential to reduce their risk of unwanted pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) without unacceptable side effects. Newly developed oral contraceptives that contain the progestins desogestrel or norgestimate (Desogen, Ortho-Cept, Ortho-Cyclen, and Ortho Tri-Cyclen) have fewer metabolic and androgen-related side effects yet maintain the progestational suppression of ovulation and the endometrium. The failure rate for these progestin pills is under 1%. A Sunday start regimen may be most appropriate for adolescents who have intercourse on weekends. To avoid discontinuation, adolescents should be counseled that breakthrough bleeding may occur for the first three cycles. Also recommended for use by adolescents is the new female condom--the only female-controlled method that confers protection against both pregnancy and STDs. With careful, consistent use, the female condom has a failure rate of 2.6% in the first six months.^ieng