![]() |
||||
|
|
||||
|
|
||||
Re: [Birth Control] Ortho-Cyclen vs Ortho-Tri-CyclenFrom: William McIntosh, MD (anonymous@obgyn.net)Wed, 12 Jun 2002 09:27:39 -0500 (CDT)
At Tue, 11 Jun 2002, Fiona wrote: > >Can someone explain the difference between Ortho-Cyclen and Ortho >Tri-Cyclen? I understand the different dose rates of norgestimate (ie. >the dose increases week-by-week in the Ortho-Tri-Cyclen, but is the same >(higher) dose each week in the Ortho-Cyclen) but wonder what this means >in terms of 1) impact on the individual, and 2) why one is prescribed >over the other? I have been on Ortho-Cyclen (very happily), but was just >given Orth-Tri-Cyclen - and I don't know why. I think it might have >been by mistake and am wondering if it really makes much difference? If >I just take the Ortho-Tri-Cyclen, what changes might I expect? Bias warning: I don't like triphasic pills. The reason that I don't like them is all the phone calls about breakthrough bleeding, etc,etc that my office staff and I have to handle about them. The idea of a triphasic is that the patient will take a somewhat smaller overall dose of hormone each month, with a theoretical reduction in side effects. This is a laudable goal, and for those women (a majority to be sure) that do well on them, great. Same hormones as the monophasic, just as effective contraception. However, there is an increased risk of midcycle spotting or bleeding, and that is what I get the calls about. I have yet to see any convincing data that supports the contention that the side effects are reduced either. They are not bad pills, don't get me wrong, and you will probably do well. If you don't want to change, call your doc and have the script changed.
-- William D. McIntosh, MD, FACOG
|
|
Return to ![]()
Report TECHNICAL Problems ONLY to: webmaster@obgyn.net
Last Updated: Mon Nov 2 06:39:02 2009
Women's Insurance Checklist from Auto Insurance Quote
home | medical professionals | women | industry | forums | international