Puzzling Over the Hurt Down-Under
Serious Mental Illness and Contraception
New 13-Cycle Vaginal Contraceptive System
The Future of Family Planning in Post-COVID America
New ASCCP Guidelines: Implications for FP
On the alert: mood disorders during 2020 stressors
Challenges old and new during the pandemic
Reproductive health in the time of Covid-19
Missed Pills: The Problem That Hasn’t Gone Away
Find the “yes! . . . and” rather than “no” or “but”
Digital Family Planning: the Future is Now
Irregular Bleeding Due to Contraceptives
Ouch! Best approaches to menstrual pain
Contraceptive efficacy: understanding how user and method characteristics play their part
Strategizing treatment for chronic heavy menstrual bleeding
Untangling the literature on obesity and contraception
High tech apps for no-tech FABM
Menstrual exacerbation of other medical conditions
From Princeton University: Thomas James Trussell (1949-2018)
The Short and Long of IUD Use Duration
Selecting a Method When Guidance Isn’t Clear-cut
Healthcare in the Time of Digital Expansion
The Scoop on Two New FDA-Approved Contraceptive Methods
Pregnancy of unknown location—meeting the challenge
Big “yes” (with caveats) to CHCs during perimenopause
The role of IUDs (LNG IUDs, too!) in emergency contraception
Combined pills’ effect on mood disorders
Abortion in the U.S.: safe, declining, and under threat
Hope for ovarian cancer screening test
Breast cancer still a small risk with some hormonal contraceptives
Record rate of HPV-related throat cancer
Viruses in semen potentially transmissible
Don’t Abstain from Your Role in Abstinence
Teens births declining but geographic ‘hotspots’ defy trend
Online Medical Abortion Service Effective and Safe
Do Women Really Need to Wait That Long?
Reassuring news on depression and OC use
PMDD: Genetic clues may lead to improved treatment
Breast cancer risk when there is a family history
Body weight link to breast and endometrial cancers (and 11 others)
Family Planning in 2017 and Beyond
Make Me Cry: Depression Link (Again)?
Managing implant users’ bleeding and spotting
Zika: Updated guidance for providers
Pharmacist-prescribed contraceptives
Hot off the press! 2016 MEC and SPR
Zika virus fears prompt increased request for abortion in nations outlawing abortions
Opioid use epidemic among reproductive-age women
Good news on the family planning home front!
War Against Planned Parenthood Hurts Women
Win-win for both treatment and prevention
Menopause, mood, mental acuity, and hormone therapy
Emergency contraception for teens
Postpartum Contraception: Now, Not Later
Are we practicing what we preach?
Be alert to VTE in hormonal contraceptive users
LARC among teens increased 15-fold, but not enough
Brain cancer and hormonal contraception
Free tools: Easy access to the US Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use
Alcohol consumption when pregnancy is unwanted or unintended
Latest Data on Contraceptive Use in the United States
LateBreaker sampler from Contraceptive Technology conference
Emergency Contraceptive Pill Efficacy and BMI/Body Weight
Handout on Unintended Pregnancy and Contraceptive Choice
Ask About Withdrawal (Really!)
Rules to Practice By: Safety First and Cleanliness is Close to. . .
What’s Vanity Fair Got Against the NuvaRing?
Promising New Treatment for Hepatitis C
Numbers matter, so make them simple for patients
The Recession’s Effect on Unintended Pregnancies
Lessons Learned from the Contraceptive CHOICE Project: The Hull LARC Initiative
Applying the “New” Cervical Cytology Guidelines in Your Practice
Acute Excessive Uterine Bleeding: New Management Strategies
Medical indications for IUD use in teens

Patients with underlying chronic medical conditions can present a challenge for their providers. While the U.S. Medical Eligibility Criteria covers 60 medical conditions, some of those conditions fall in that gray zone requiring the weighing the advantages and disadvantages of a using contraceptive method. Yet other chronic medical conditions are not even listed in the U.S. MEC.[1] So what is a reasonable strategy for dealing with decisions about using a contraceptive method when a patient has one of the conditions not covered? Co-authors Rebecca Allen and Carrie Cwiak take a clinical problem-solving approach to determining a contraceptive fit for patients with chronic health issues in their new chapter on Contraception for Women with Medical Conditions in the just-published edition of Contraceptive Technology.[2]
Health care providers may be concerned about the effects that contraceptives have on a patient’s medical condition, and therefore may avoid providing contraceptives or addressing family planning needs. However, adverse outcomes and disease progression are often greater during pregnancy, and especially unintended pregnancy, than during contraceptive use.
But even if the relative risk for a contraceptive-related side effect is very high, the absolute risk of an event may still be low, if the background risk in the population is low. For example, the relative risk of developing a benign liver tumor with COC use is 500. This risk appears to be quite high until you understand that this is such a rare occurrence that the chance that a COC user will develop a benign liver tumor (i.e., the absolute risk) is only 1 in 50,000 COC users.[3] In other words, a large multiple of a rare event is still a rare event.
In the presence of many chronic medical conditions, pregnancy significantly—even dramatically—increases the risks of complications such as VTE, uncontrolled blood pressure, or stroke. Contraception in these instances is a vital preventive for both unintended pregnancy and the serious pregnancy-related complications that can develop in women with these medical conditions. In addition, contraception can help women plan for a more optimally timed pregnancy in those situations where a developing fetus may be harmed by an underlying illness or treatment for it. For example, pregnancy loss and congenital defects are more likely in patients with poorly controlled diabetes. Pregnancy in women taking teratogenic medications (e.g., antiepileptic drugs, isotretinoin) is associated with an elevated risk of birth defects.
When the U.S. MEC doesn’t list the condition
Some medical conditions are not listed in the U.S. MEC because there is not enough medical evidence on contraception use in that population of patients to inform recommendations. So how do health care providers manage the patient with a medical condition that is not listed in the U.S. MEC? In this case, the following options should be considered:
- Consider the risks inherent in the condition itself and review the recommendations for conditions that have similar risk. For example, cerebral aneurysm is not listed in the MEC but migraine with aura is, and so following the guidelines for migraine with aura might be prudent in order to avoid an increased risk of stroke with contraceptive use.
- Consider the themes of the U.S. MEC, including that—
- Estrogen-containing contraceptives increase cardiovascular risk
- Progestins generally do not
- Nearly all women are eligible for at least one of the long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARC) methods
- Research other sources such as UpToDate, PubMed, etc. for guidance.
- Consult with the other health care providers involved in your patient’s care.
The U.S. MEC will have the greatest benefit for women if it is used by health care providers in everyday practice in order to decrease unnecessary barriers to contraceptive access. There is always a contraceptive method to choose that can be used safely by a women with a chronic medical condition. And there are a number of health issues for that pose no contraindications to contraceptive use. (See Table 1.)
Table 1. Conditions that are generally not a contraindication for contraceptives | |
Age | Benign breast cysts |
Past ectopic pregnancy | Family history of cancer |
Obesity | Ovarian cancer |
Gestational hypertension | Dysmenorrhea |
Gestational diabetes | Uterine fibroids |
Varicose veins | Cervical dysplasia |
Migraines without aura | HIV |
Epilepsy | Thyroid disease |
Depression | Cystic fibrosis |
Abnormal uterine bleeding | Sickle cell anemia |
Endometriosis | Iron deficiency anemia |
Benign ovarian cysts | Antibiotic use |
Adapted from: Curtis KM, et al. (2016). |
[1] Curtis KM, Tepper NK, Jatlaoui TC, et al. U.S. medical eligibility criteria for contraceptive use, 2016. MMWR Recomm Rep 2016;65:1–104.
[2] Hatcher RA, Nelson AL, Trussell J, Cwiak C, Cason P, Policar MS, Edelman A, Aiken ARA, Marrazzo J, Kowal D, eds. Contraceptive technology. 21st ed. New York, NY: Ayer Company Publishers, Inc., 2018.
[3] Kapp N, Curtis KM. Hormonal contraceptive use among women with liver tumors: a systematic review. Contraception. 2009 Oct;80:387-90