Five-year experience with Norplant®

A cohort study of Norplant implant: Side-effects and acceptance

“…The difference between the two rates is not statistically significant (p > 0.2). This rate of Norplant removal is much lower than that of a previous study, which showed 8.7% by month 36 [37]. In this study, acceptors who experienced irregular menstrual bleeding, after receiving counseling understood that bleeding is not serious.…”

“…This removal makes up the largest of all terminations, where the removal rate of IUD is much larger than that of Norplant and thus makes a significant difference (p <0.001). The rate of Norplant removal by month 36 is fairly low compared with that of a previous study, which was 2.5% [37]. …”

“…The difference between the two groups is statistically significant (p<0.002). Previous researchers found 88.3% by 36 months for Norplant [37].…”

“…This occurs in 0.0-0.5% of women in the first three months after insertion [36]. In the first five years of use, the chances of pregnancy are less than one per 100 women per year, and no pregnancies in year 1 [5,[37][38][39][40][41][42][43]. Amenorrhea is less common than prolonged bleeding or spotting.…”

A review of the effects of long-acting progestogen-only contraceptives on ovarian activity

“…They provide a very important option for women desiring long-term reversible contraception. From Affandi et al [3], Klinik Raden Saleh [4] Table 1 shows the cumulative pregnancy rates of Norplant which are lower when compared with the pregnancy rates for depomedroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA) and the intrauterine device, Lippes Loop C; data are from the same clinic (Affandi et al [3]). In this study the Norplant system is seen to combine the highest continuation rate with long-term effectiveness among the reversible temporary contraceptive methods tested.…”