Navigating the Clinical Impact of Hormonal Contraceptives: Part I

Table 1: Advantages and disadvantages of barrier contraception, Copper IUD, fertility awareness methods, and sterilization

Non-hormonal contraceptives do not affect the natural menstrual cycle or endogenous hormone fluctuations. These methods include barrier methods (condoms, diaphragms), the copper intrauterine device (IUD), fertility awareness-based methods, and sterilization. The copper IUD is highly effective and long-lasting; however, it may be associated with heavier menstrual bleeding, potentially deterring some athletes. Fertility awareness requires diligent tracking and exhibits a higher failure rate, yet it appeals to individuals seeking to avoid synthetic hormones.

"Hormonal contraceptives introduce synthetic hormones to suppress natural ovarian hormone production..."

Hormonal contraceptives introduce synthetic hormones to suppress natural ovarian hormone production, thereby inhibiting ovulation and maintaining consistently low levels of endogenous sex hormones.

• Combined Hormonal Contraceptives (CHCs) contain both estrogen and progestin, which are available as oral contraceptive pills (OCPs), transdermal patches, and vaginal rings. They offer predictable cycles and symptom relief but carry a low, yet clinically relevant, risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE).
• Progestin-Only Contraceptives (POCs) include progestin-only pills, injections, hIUDs, and implants. They are increasingly popular because they often induce amenorrhea (absence of bleeding). However, certain POCs, notably implants, have been associated with a higher incidence of perceived side effects, such as irregular bleeding or mood changes.

Performance and Injury Risk Implications

The impact of HCs on athletic performance is characterized by significant individual variability, making universal conclusions difficult. They have a minimal negative impact on overall physical performance, with no significant differences observed in markers of maximal strength or power^(5,6). For example, a trivial to minor reduction in aerobic capacity (VO₂max) among high-intensity cycling users, although the clinical impact for most athletes is considered minor.

A critical physiological consideration is that HCs, especially OCPs, significantly reduce both total and free testosterone levels. Combined Hormonal Contraceptives can reduce total testosterone by 50–60% and free testosterone by 60–80%, primarily through the suppression of androgen synthesis and an increase in Sex Hormone-Binding Globulin (SHBG), which inactivates testosterone^(7,8). Given that testosterone influences motivation, mood, and potentially muscle mass and competitive persistence, this suppression may affect some athletes more than others. Despite these changes, many athletes perceive HCs as positive or neutral because the reduction in negative menstrual symptoms allows for more effective training.

The relationship between HC use and injury is complex. Hormonal contraceptives, particularly OCPs, are associated with a lower incidence of ACL injuries requiring reconstruction^(5,6). This may be attributed to the synthetic hormones stabilizing the response of connective tissues to hormonal fluctuations. Oral contraceptive pill users also tend to report fewer musculotendinous injuries⁽⁹⁾. However, HCs are not protective against all injury types₍₁₀₎. For example, researchers at the University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center in the USA found that systemic use of both CHC and POCs increases the risk of specific hip pathologies, including labral tears and greater trochanteric pain syndrome, within five years of initiating the method⁽¹¹⁾. Evidence regarding general musculoskeletal injuries and bone stress fractures remains inconsistent; many studies have shown no significant effect.

"The influence of hormone contraceptives on female athletes is highly individualized..."

Long-Term Effects and Potential Adverse Outcomes

Although most research indicates no major non-reversible long-term adverse effects, several clinical considerations require monitoring.

1. Cardiovascular and metabolic health: Hormonal contraceptives can alter biomarkers, including elevating markers of chronic low-grade inflammation, such as C-reactive protein (CRP). Although the clinical significance for athletes remains unclear, this association theoretically relates to long-term cardiovascular risk. Combined Hormonal Contraceptives are also associated with an increased risk of arterial thrombotic events and stroke, although the absolute risk remains low. Moreover, long-term use may lead to increased body fat percentage and potential compromises in bone health, contingent upon the specific formulation⁽¹²⁾.
2. Reproductive health and "masking": Long-term hormonal contraceptive use does not result in permanent fertility loss, and fertility typically returns to normal shortly after discontinuation. However, a significant concern for practitioners is that HCs can mask underlying menstrual dysfunction. Athletes with Relative Energy Deficiency in Sport (RED-S) may experience withdrawal bleeds while on HCs, potentially creating a false appearance of health while their underlying physiological state remains compromised^(7,8).

Finally, practitioners should be aware of the "reproductive window" for elite athletes. Research in sports such as rowing and rugby suggests that these athletes may experience earlier menopause onset or higher rates of infertility treatment following their careers if they exhibited menstrual irregularities during their active years. Education regarding fertility options, including egg cryopreservation, is increasingly important for athletes planning to start families later in life.

Conclusion 

The influence of hormone contraceptives on female athletes is highly individualized, offering clear benefits in symptom management and potential protection against ACL injuries, alongside challenges such as hormone suppression and the masking of underlying health issues. Practitioners should prioritize individualized monitoring and open dialogue. This foundation lays the groundwork for Part II, which will detail a decision-making framework for integrating these considerations into an athlete’s long-term health and performance plan.

References

1. Sports Med. 2024;54(12):3181-3197. 
2. Int J of Sports Physiology and Performance. 2018;13(7):926-932. 
3. Sports Med. 2024;54(12):3181-3197. 
4. Med & Science in Sports & Exercise. 2022;54(9S):8-8. 
5. The J of Arthros & Related Surgery. 2025;41(9):3413-3421. 
6. The J of Arthros & Related Surgery. 2025;41(9):3422-3424. 
7. The Eur J of Contraception & Reproductive Health Care. 2024;29(1):8-14. 
8. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2025;125(7):1923-1932. 
9. Orthopaedic J of Sports Med. 2019;7(3):232596711983106. 
10. Sports Med. 54, 2515 - 2530. 
11. The J of Arthros & Related Surgery. 2025;41(12):5118-5124. 
12. Sports Med. 2017;47(1):175-185.