Home or office etonogestrel implant insertion after pregnancy: a randomized trial

OBJECTIVES:To evaluate whether home visits for contraceptive implant insertion result in an increase in postpartum uptake compared to clinic insertion and to assess the feasibility of home insertions. STUDY DESIGN:We randomized women within 10 weeks of a birth or dilation and curettage (D&C) for abortion or miscarriage to home or standard office insertion. The primary outcome was successful insertion of the implant. To achieve 80% power to detect a 40% difference in visit attendance, 20 women were assigned to each group. The secondary outcome was attendance of the 4-week postpartum visit. RESULTS:From June 2013 through February 2014, we screened 45 women and 40 were randomly assigned to home and office insertion visits. We enrolled 37 postpartum women and 3 women post-D&C. Because of the significant under enrollment of the latter, we chose to report results of only the postpartum women. The results were similar whether we included or excluded post-abortion women. A majority of women desired a home visit for their implant insertion appointment at time of enrollment. Postpartum appointment attendance rates were similar between home and office visits at 53% and 50% (p=1.00), respectively. Home visits resulted in a trend toward increased implant uptake [12/19 (63%) vs 6/18 (33%), p=.10]. CONCLUSION:Home insertion of the contraceptive implant may be a feasible option. Future studies that examine the feasibility and uptake in both postpartum and post-D&C women are warranted. IMPLICATIONS:Women reported preference for home insertion visits in this pilot study. We also showed that a greater proportion of women received the etonogestrel implant at a home visit compared to the current standard of care, which may warrant larger studies that would have sufficient power to evaluate smaller differences.