Sunday, March 8, 2015

Prós e Contras da Contraceção Hormonal

Many benefits of the contraceptive pill are recognized in healthy women: regular cycles, without heavy bleeding, without dysmenorrhea and without premenstrual syndrome. But the contraceptive pill can be used for specific therapeutic objectives: treatment of polycystic ovaries, endometriosis, vaginal bleeding disorders and in long term acne, seborrhea, hirsutism and alopecia therapy (contraceptive pills containing ethinyl estradiol and a progestogen with antiandrogenic activity). There is still scientific evidence that the contraceptive pill reduces the risk of appearance of tumors or cysts in the ovary or endometrium.

However the contraceptive pill also has its risks. These being dependent on the dose, it is estimated that in modern low-dose oral contraceptives, they are much less frequent and intense than in the early days of their marketing, but do not fail to manifest themselves. The most common are those that lead to a decrease in physical and / or psychological well-being of women. There is also some scientific evidence that hormonal contraceptives may be involved in the onset / development of benign liver tumors as well as increased risk of gallstones. But the most serious adverse effects are cardiovascular effects: increased risk of thromboembolic disease, onset / worsening of hypertension, dyslipidaemia and glucose intolerance, and the consequent increased risk of cardiovascular disease. Finally, the literature refers that hormonal contraceptives increase the risk of developing certain cancers, especially in the cervix and breast.

As with any drug, the risk-benefit ratio must always be taken into account when prescribing one contraceptive pill, and the principle of therapeutic individualization should be based on scientific and clinical but also personal and socio-economic criteria. Also in regard to contraception we should follow evidence-based medicine: use all the scientific information and make it available to the woman so that she, in the biopsychosocial context in which it appears, can make an informed decision regarding her fertility.

Keywords: Contraception, dyslipidemias, evidence-based medicine

full txt in Portugal:
Acta Farmacêutica Portuguesa 2014, vol. 3, n. 2, pp. 113-123

Wednesday, March 4, 2015


BMJ Open 5:e006013 doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006013
  • Epidemiology

Abortion legislation, maternal healthcare, fertility, female literacy, sanitation, violence against women and maternal deaths: a natural experiment in 32 Mexican states

  1. John Thorp7,8
+Author Affiliations
  1. 1Division of EpidemiologyMELISA InstituteConcepción, Chile
  2. 2Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyDuke University Medical CenterDurham, USA
  3. 3Instituto de Investigaciones Sociales, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Av Universidad 3000, Copilco UniversidadCiudad de México, Mexico
  4. 4Division of Public Health, Department of Family and Preventive MedicineUniversity of Utah School of MedicineSalt Lake City, USA
  5. 5Coordinación de Investigación, Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud, Universidad AnáhuacEstado de México, Mexico
  6. 6Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyWest Virginia UniversityMorgantown, USA
  7. 7Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyUniversity of North Carolina-Chapel HillChapel Hill, USA
  8. 8Center for Women's Health Research, University of North Carolina School of MedicineChapel Hill, USA
  1. Correspondence toDr Elard Koch;
  • Received 1 July 2014
  • Revised 28 November 2014
  • Accepted 2 December 2014
  • Published 23 February 2015


Objective To test whether there is an association between abortion legislation and maternal mortality outcomes after controlling for other factors thought to influence maternal health.
Design Population-based natural experiment.
Setting and data sources Official maternal mortality data from 32 federal states of Mexico between 2002 and 2011.
Main outcomes Maternal mortality ratio (MMR), MMR with any abortive outcome (MMRAO) and induced abortion mortality ratio (iAMR).
Independent variables Abortion legislation grouped as less (n=18) or more permissive (n=14); constitutional amendment protecting the unborn (n=17); skilled attendance at birth; all-abortion hospitalisation ratio; low birth weight rate; contraceptive use; total fertility rates (TFR); clean water; sanitation; female literacy rate and intimate-partner violence.
Main results Over the 10-year period, states with less permissive abortion legislation exhibited lower MMR (38.3 vs 49.6; p<0.001), MMRAO (2.7 vs 3.7; p<0.001) and iAMR (0.9 vs 1.7; p<0.001) than more permissive states. Multivariate regression models estimating effect sizes (β-coefficients) for mortality outcomes showed independent associations (p values between 0.001 and 0.055) with female literacy (β=−0.061 to −1.100), skilled attendance at birth (β=−0.032 to −0.427), low birth weight (β=0.149 to 2.166), all-abortion hospitalisation ratio (β=−0.566 to −0.962), clean water (β=−0.048 to −0.730), sanitation (β=−0.052 to −0.758) and intimate-partner violence (β=0.085 to 0.755). TFR showed an inverse association with MMR (β=−14.329) and MMRAO (β=−1.750) and a direct association with iAMR (β=1.383). Altogether, these factors accounted for (R2) 51–88% of the variance among states in overall mortality rates. No statistically independent effect was observed for abortion legislation, constitutional amendment or other covariates.
Conclusions Although less permissive states exhibited consistently lower maternal mortality rates, this finding was not explained by abortion legislation itself. Rather, these differences were explained by other independent factors, which appeared to have a more favourable distribution in these states.