TIMING OF ONSET OF CONTRACEPTIVE EFFECTIVENESS IN NORPLANT IMPLANT USERS - PART I - CHANGES IN CERVICAL-MUCUS

Objective: To provide scientific data regarding the changes in cervica l mucus within the first hours to days after Norplant implant insertio n and to estimate when the cervical mucus is hostile enough to suggest a contraceptive effect.Design: Multicenter, clinical descriptive stud y. Setting: Family planning clinics. Patient(s): Forty-two women who w ere between days 8 and 13 of their menstrual cycle and who had request ed Norplant implants were admitted to the study. Intervention(s): Cerv ical mucus and blood samples were obtained. Main Outcome Measure(s): C ervical mucus scores, sperm penetration distances, and serum levels of progesterone, estradiol, and levonorgestrel. Result(s): The median ce rvical mucus score observed at baseline was 6 (''fair''), indicating t hat the mucus was already somewhat hostile before insertion of the Nor plant implants. The median scores declined to 5 at 12 and 24 hours and continued to decrease through day 7 to 2 (''poor''), a score that is judged as hostile to sperm penetration. Overall, 73% of all subjects h ad a poor cervical mucus score by 3 days after insertion; at 7 days af ter insertion, 90% exhibited poor mucus and none had a good score. The re was a substantial drop in the overall median distance traveled by t he vanguard sperm after 12 hours for each cervical mucus score groupin g. The distance traveled decreased rapidly between 12 and 24 hours to <0.5 cm in subjects with fair and poor mucus, and by day 3, 91% of the subjects exhibited poor sperm penetration. Conclusion(s): On the basi s of our findings, deterioration of the quality of the cervical mucus and sperm penetration is evident by 24 hours after insertion, although not to a level that would suggest adequate protection until 72 hours after insertion. Therefore, we are confident in recommending that back up methods of contraception (e.g., condoms) need not be used for more than 3 days after insertion, even when the implants are inserted close to ovulation. These findings provide policy makers, clinic managers, and clinicians with important information about how they can improve c lient access to Norplant implants. (C) 1998 by American Society for Re productive Medicine.