Objective: Study the vascular risk in women using oral hormonal contraception. Design and method: Descriptive study, interested in studying the blood pressures of women using contraception compared to women not using it. The data were entered and analyzed by Epi-info 6 software. Results: In total, 122 women were included in our study, 36 of whom were aged between 21 and 55 years, or 29.5% of cases. Women aged over 60 represented 73.7% of cases; 54.1% were married. There were 98 women users of oral contraception (OC), all ages combined, or 80.3%, compared to 25 women who did not use OC, or 20.5%. The prevalence of hypertension was 74.2% among female OC users; and 68% among women who do not use CO. Epidemiological profile and associated risk factors of hypertensive women using oral contraception: In number of 72. Women aged under 50 represented 23.6% and those aged over 60: 76.4%. A low socioeconomic level was noted for 72.2% and medium for 23.6%. Low educational level: 45.8%, Women who did not have a profession represented 70%. Married women represented 60% of cases and widows 38.9% with an average number of children of five. The average duration of hypertension was 12.15 ± 7.75 years, with a length of service ranging from one year to 40 years. The average duration of contraception was 24 ±7.6 years. Associated risk factors: diabetes 44.4%, hypercholesterolemia: 18.1%, migraine 14%, obesity: 12.5% and tobacco 4.2%. Conclusions: Many epidemiological data has investigated the link between oral contraceptive use and elevated blood pressure. In our study, hypertensive women who used oral contraception had significant risk factors; long-standing high blood pressure with an average of more than ten years and taking oral contraception for a long time with an average of more than twenty years. A woman with high blood pressure will be more limited than other women in her choice of contraceptive method.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Samira Benbekhti Abdrebbi (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: