Talk:Etonogestrel birth control implant

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Etonogestrel birth control implant redirect.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL

Medicine: Reproductive Mid‑importance

	Medicine portal This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine
Mid	This redirect has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This redirect is supported by the Reproductive medicine task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Sexology and sexuality High‑importance

	Human sexuality portal This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality
High	This redirect has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Pharmacology High‑importance

	This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Pharmacology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pharmacology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PharmacologyWikipedia:WikiProject PharmacologyTemplate:WikiProject Pharmacologypharmacology
High	This redirect has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Proposed Infobox for individual birth control method articles

Let's all work on reaching a consensus for a new infobox to be placed on each individual birth control method's article. I've created one to start with on the Wikipedia Proposed Infoboxes page, so go check it out and get involved in the process. MamaGeek (Talk/Contrib) 12:26, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV

The information provided in this article is basically an advertorial from the big corporate pharmaceutical manufacturer. It is in no way neutral, but motivated by profit via "educational" campaigns, namely, the marketing/pr budget of the drug company.

ALL artificial hormones are associated with increased cancer risk.

The Norplant device, subject of much litigation and now banned in the US, is alarmingly similar to Implanon in that it 1) uses artificial hormones 2) can become embedded in the arm of the wearer, covered with scar tissue.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cindery (talk • contribs) 21:59, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Please start with an open discussion here, including your sources for allegations. The NPOV tag should really not be used until a discussion is deadlocked. JFW | T@lk 21:07, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Califonia does know the hormone in question here to be carincogenic. State document is cited to show this. --Howrealisreal 23:17, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mechanism of Action

I altered the bit about endometrium lining thining because it was phrased (possibly intentionally) in such a way as to sound that this was not a factor in Implanon's prevention of successful implantation. Implanon's own website stipulates that it is: http://www.implanon-usa.com/authfiles/images/543_174732.pdf I also included that mucus buildups can reduce the likelihood of implantation after fertilization, and that some people consider these to mechanisms to be abortive. Christiangoth 03:46, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weight gain parameter in infobox

I would like to treat this parameter the same on all the hormonal contraception articles. Please read my opinion and discuss this issue at Talk:Combined oral contraceptive pill#Weight parameter in infobox. Lyrl^Talk _C 21:30, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Failure Rates

The summary table failure rate (0.05%) conflicts with the stated stated rate in the main article (0.1%). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.178.133.15 (talk) 04:04, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Upper Arm?

Can anyone explain/add why it is implanted in the upper arm? Young friend has an implant, but she doesn't know why it had to be there, rather than any other site - e.g calf, forearm. Convenience? Or minimal risk of injury to area? Bluedawe 21:29, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. Unopposed for over two weeks. Jenks24 (talk) 20:54, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Implanon → Nexplanon – As the now updated article introduction states, Implanon has been replaced by Nexplanon. Relisted. Jenks24 (talk) 19:47, 8 June 2012 (UTC) Mikael Häggström (talk) 18:57, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

spelling and meaning...

In the entire article, the generic name of the drug is misspelled. It should be "etonogestrel" not "etonorgestrel"

in the entry for implantable contraceptives a major heading is "Devise Description". THis is not correct. It should be "Device Description". "Devise" means to make something: "Device" is the thing made........

You devise a solution to a problem: the problem may be with a device.

Got it?

"Eradication of Libido" as a side effect

Listing "eradication of libido" as a side effect seems to give undue emphasis to a less common side effect of this method of birth control. Loss of libido is listed already under other possible effects. Eradication seems to be to be a biased and emotionally charged word choice. In addition the citation listed is a web posting based on personal experience asking whether or not loss of libido is a side effect of Implanon. It is not a credible source. I propose that it be removed as a separate side effect, and continue to be listed under other possible side effects. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SarahRose12 34 (talk • contribs) 19:48, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Versions of these devices

User:UCDEBS Nexplanon and Implanon are just two brand names. There are however others including generics.

The device is formally improved for three years though it appears to last for at least give, thus "The device is placed under the skin and lasts at least 3 years." is more accurate.

Why was this removed "It is not recommended in people with liver disease"?

Also books need page numbers.

Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 13:48, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nexplanon is the only subdermal contraceptive implant available in the US; it replaced Implanon which was made by the same company. There are no generic contraceptive implants available in the US.
"at least" 3 years is not more accurate, when current data and clinical consensus indicates that the single rod subdermal contraceptive implant remains highly effective for 5 years...and unnecessary removal and replacement causes pain, risk of infection and is a waste of money
Statement that "it is not recommended in people with liver disease" was removed because it is overly broad (there are lots of types of liver disease) to the point of being not accurate (see the 2016 CDC Medical Eligibility Criteria for contraceptive use, or page 134 of the 21st edition of Contraceptive Technology).
Page numbers for book chapter have been added.

Be well UCDEBS (talk) 01:00, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User:UCDEBS Wikipedia is not exclusively written for people who live within the United States but is global in scope. A generic version is avaliable in the United Kingdom for example.
The FDA still lists three years in the product monograph.[1] Thus it is important to note that. When the PI updates I agree that we should drop the 3 years but until than...
Contraindications include "Liver tumors, benign or malignant, or active liver disease"
Thanks for adding the page numbers. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 10:36, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The source you used for 5 years is a little hesitant "The etonogestrel implant is effective for at least 4 years. One large study reported no pregnancies among 204 women using the etonogestrel implant for 5 years (113). In another study, no pregnancies were reported among 102 study participants who used the etonogestrel implant for 5 years (110). These study results may not be generalizable to obese women because only 6% of participants in the first study and 50% in the second study were obese." Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 10:37, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Which page of this are you looking at https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/65/rr/pdfs/rr6503.pdf

Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 10:41, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]