Letter to the Editor: Issue with article title, "Progestogen-only pill for emergency contraception”

A reader writes in to discuss an issue with an article published on June 15, 2021, titled "Progestogen-only pill for emergency contraception."

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Contemporary OB/GYN® or affiliates.

Dear Editors:

The June 15, 2021, Contemporary OB/GYN® journal carried an article entitled “Progestogen-only pill for emergency contraception”. The title was somewhat misleading, since the progestin-only pill was not used as emergency contraception to protect against pregnancy from prior unprotected intercourse, but to act as a bridge to prevent pregnancy from future acts that occur after use of EC. The more important point that should be emphasized is that if POPs are going to be used as bridging contraceptives, then the more effective EC with ulipristal acetate (“ella”) cannot be used. If women are relying on the OTC EC with levonorgestrel, POPs would be an excellent addition, but there are significant concerns that LNG-EC is not as effective as the UPA EC Product, especially for women with higher BMIs.

Thank you,

Anita L. Nelson:dk

Professor and Chair of OB-GYN, Western University of Health Sciences, Pomona, CA

Professor Emeritus, OB-GYN, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA

Clinical Professor OB-GYN, USC, Los Angeles, CA