Emergency Contraception

This document updates previous Faculty of Sexual & Reproductive Healthcare (FSRH) guidance and aims to summarise the available evidence on emergency contraception (EC). The guidance is intended for use by health professionals providing EC. 

Please read this guidance document in conjunction with any relevant clinical statements for this topic:

FSRH CEU Statement Response to Edelman 2022 (August 2022)

FSRH CEU Statement: Response to Endler 2022 (July 2022)

FSRH CEU Statement: Combined oral contraceptive interference with the ability of ulipristal acetate to delay ovulation: A prospective cohort study (August 2018)

FSRH CEU response to European Medicines Agency recommendations regarding use of ulipristal acetate for management of uterine fibroids (February 2018)

FSRH CEU Statement: Response to Recent Publication Regarding Banh, et al - November 2020

FSRH CEU Statement: Response to Recent Publication Turok et al. (2021) - February 2021

A study published today in the Lancet reports that a combination of levonorgestrel 1.5mg with piroxicam is more effective for emergency contraception than levonorgestrel 1.5mg alone.

A new study (Edelman 2022) adds to the evidence around use of LNG-EC by those with higher weight/BMI but does not give a clear enough picture to inform any change in guidance.

A recently-published literature review considers the evidence around mechanism of action of levonorgestrel oral emergency contraception (LNG-EC). The findings support current FSRH guidance on emergency contraception, and are reassuring for those with ethical concerns about post-ovulation effects.

Evidence from new study supports the existing FSRH recommendation that commencement of hormonal contraception should be delayed for 5 days after UPA-EC. Published 28/8/2018.