Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Observational Study
. 2016 Jan 6:352:h6712.
doi: 10.1136/bmj.h6712.

Maternal use of oral contraceptives and risk of birth defects in Denmark: prospective, nationwide cohort study

Affiliations
Observational Study

Maternal use of oral contraceptives and risk of birth defects in Denmark: prospective, nationwide cohort study

Brittany M Charlton et al. BMJ. .

Abstract

Study question: Is oral contraceptive use around the time of pregnancy onset associated with an increased risk of major birth defects?

Methods: In a prospective observational cohort study, data on oral contraceptive use and major birth defects were collected among 880,694 live births from Danish registries between 1997 and 2011. We conservatively assumed that oral contraceptive exposure lasted up to the most recently filled prescription. The main outcome measure was the number of major birth defects throughout one year follow-up (defined according to the European Surveillance of Congenital Anomalies classification). Logistic regression estimated prevalence odds ratios of any major birth defect as well as categories of birth defect subgroups.

Study answer and limitations: Prevalence of major birth defects (per 1000 births) was consistent across each oral contraceptive exposure group (25.1, never users; 25.0, use >3 months before pregnancy onset (reference group); 24.9, use 0-3 months before pregnancy onset (that is, recent use); 24.8, use after pregnancy onset). No increase in prevalence of major birth defects was seen with oral contraceptive exposure among women with recent use before pregnancy (prevalence odds ratio 0.98 (95% confidence interval 0.93 to 1.03)) or use after pregnancy onset (0.95 (0.84 to 1.08)), compared with the reference group. There was also no increase in prevalence of any birth defect subgroup (for example, limb defects). It is unknown whether women took oral contraceptives up to the date of their most recently filled prescription. Also, the rarity of birth defects made disaggregation of the results difficult. Residual confounding was possible, and the analysis lacked information on folate, one of the proposed mechanisms.

What this study adds: Oral contraceptive exposure just before or during pregnancy does not appear to be associated with an increased risk of major birth defects.

Funding, competing interests, data sharing: BMC was funded by the Harvard T H Chan School of Public Health's Maternal Health Task Force and Department of Epidemiology Rose Traveling Fellowship; training grant T32HD060454 in reproductive, perinatal, and paediatric epidemiology and award F32HD084000 from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development; and grant T32CA09001 from the National Cancer Institute. The authors have no competing interests or additional data to share.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at www.icmje.org/coi_disclosure.pdf (available on request from the corresponding author) and declare: support from the Harvard T H Chan School of Public Health, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, and National Cancer Institute for the submitted work; no financial relationships with any organisations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous three years; no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.

Comment in

  • "Pille" löst keine Missbildungen aus.
    Holzgreve H. Holzgreve H. MMW Fortschr Med. 2016 Mar 3;158(4):42. doi: 10.1007/s15006-016-7875-z. MMW Fortschr Med. 2016. PMID: 27119883 German. No abstract available.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Mosher WD, Jones J. Use of contraception in the United States: 1982-2008. Vital Health Stat 23 2010:1-44. - PubMed
    1. Skouby SO. Contraceptive use and behavior in the 21st century: a comprehensive study across five European countries. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care 2004;9:57-68. - PubMed
    1. Trussell J. Contraceptive failure in the United States. Contraception 2011;83: 397-404. 10.1016/j.contraception.2011.01.021 21477680 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Black A, Francoeur D, Rowe Tet al. Canadian contraception consensus. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2004;26:347-87, 389-43. - PubMed
    1. Lewis DP, Van Dyke DC, Stumbo PJ, Berg MJ. Drug and environmental factors associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes. Part I: Antiepileptic drugs, contraceptives, smoking, and folate. Ann Pharmacother 1998;32: 802-17. 10.1345/aph.17297 9681097 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

Substances