From Research to Policy: The WHO Experience With Developing Guidelines on the Potential Risk of HIV Acquisition and Progestogen-Only Contraception Use

Self-administration of injectable contraception: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction

Depot medroxyprogesterone acetate subcutaneous injectable contraception (DMPA-SC) may facilitate self-administration and expand contraceptive access. To inform WHO guidelines on self-care interventions, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing self-administration versus provider administration of injectable contraception on outcomes of pregnancy, side effects/adverse events, contraceptive uptake, contraceptive continuation, self-efficacy/empowerment and social harms.

Methods

We searched PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, LILACS and EMBASE in September 2018 for peer-reviewed studies comparing women who received injectable contraception with the option of self-administration with women who received provider-administered injectable contraception on at least one outcome of interest. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane tool for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and the Evidence Project tool for non-randomised studies. Meta-analysis was conducted using random-effects models to generate pooled estimates of relative risk (RR).

Results

Six studies with 3851 total participants met the inclusion criteria: three RCTs and three controlled cohort studies. All studies examined self-injection of DMPA-SC; comparison groups were either provider-administered DMPA-SC or provider-administered intramuscular DMPA. All studies followed women through 12 months of contraceptive coverage and measured (dis)continuation of injectable contraception. Meta-analysis found higher rates of continuation with self-administration compared with provider administration in three RCTs (RR: 1.27, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.39) and three controlled cohort studies (RR: 1.18, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.26). Four studies reported pregnancies; all showed no difference across study arms. Four studies reported side effects/adverse events; while two controlled cohort studies showed increased injection site reactions with self-administration, no other side effects increased with self-administration. One study found no difference in social harms. No studies reported measuring uptake or self-efficacy/empowerment.

Conclusion

A growing evidence base suggests that self-administration of DMPA-SC can equal or improve contraceptive continuation rates compared with provider administration. This benefit comes without notable increases in pregnancy or safety concerns. Self-injection of DMPA-SC is a promising approach to increasing contraceptive use.

Pharmacokinetic, biologic and epidemiologic differences in MPA- and NET-based progestin-only injectable contraceptives relative to the potential impact on HIV acquisition in women

Access to safe and effective contraceptive choices is a reproductive right and contributes tremendously to improvements in maternal and child health. Progestin-only injectables, particularly intramuscularly injected depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA-IM), have received increased attention given findings suggesting a potential association with increased HIV risk. For women at high risk of HIV, the World Health Organization's Medical eligibility criteria for contraceptive use currently aggregate recommendations for all progestin-only injectables, including DMPA-IM, subcutaneously injected DMPA (DMPA-SC) and intramuscularly injected norethindrone/ norethisterone enanthate (NET-EN), except in the case of some drug interactions. We considered whether published data indicate differences or similarities between these injectables relevant to risk of acquiring HIV. In vitro data confirm different biological activities of these distinct progestins, including that MPA, and not NET, binds and activates the glucocorticoid receptor resulting in different biological effects relevant to immune function. Limited clinical data suggest changes in immunologic activity following DMPA-IM and NET-EN initiation, but interstudy variation and study design differences diminish ability to determine clinical relevance and the degree to which DMPA-IM and NET-EN could act differentially. The highest-quality epidemiologic studies suggest a potential 40% increase in HIV incidence in users of DMPA-IM relative to women not using hormonal contraception but no significant increase in risk in users of NET-EN. In our opinion, most of the available biologic activity and epidemiologic data indicate that DMPA and NET-EN are likely to act differently, and data remain too limited to evaluate differences between DMPA-IM and DMPA-SC.