Changing trends in the usage of copper intrauterine contraceptive device: a five year institutional study

Authors

  • Malavika J. C. Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, SSIMS and RC, Karnataka, India
  • Prema Prabhudev Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, SSIMS and RC, Karnataka, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20171940

Keywords:

Copper IUCD, Contraception, LARC, Request for removal, Utilization rate

Abstract

Background: Intrauterine contraceptive device is one of the commonest form of long acting contraceptive method (LARC) adapted by reproductive aged women all over the world today. It can be used for 5 to 10 years depending on the type of the device. Aim of the study was to study the institutional rate of copper IUCD usage, rate of removal, side effect profile, indications for removal among women seeking contraception.

Methods: The data regarding the usage of various temporary contraceptive methods were obtained from the family planning unit at our institution SSIMS&RC, Davangere from the records between Jan 1, 2012 to Dec 31, 2016 (5 years). A careful detailed study of records was done on the usage of Cu-IUCD.

Results: During the five year study period, 3,767 women were provided with various forms of contraceptive methods. Cu-IUCD was the commonest method used by women accounting for 42.11% (1586 users). There was a decline in the rate of usage of Cu-IUCD in 2015-16, with increase in the usage of injectables. 179 women requested for removal in the study period, main reason being desire to become pregnant in 73.18% (131) users. Failure rate in the study period was 0.55%.

Conclusions: Cu-IUCD is a safe and effective method of contraception adapted by women of reproductive age. The rate of removal is also low in our study. The decline in the usage of Cu-IUCD during our study period could be attributed to increasing awareness of other methods of LARC.

References

Mishell DR. Contraception, sterilization and pregnancy termination. In: Stenchever MA, Droegemueller W, Herbst AL, Mishell Jr DR, editors. Comprehensive Gynecology, St Louis: Mosby Inc; 2001;4:295-353.

Nnatu S. Female sterilization techniques. J Obstet Gynecol East Cent Africa. 1984;187-191.

Alvares F, Brache V, Fernandez E, Guerrero B, Guiloff E, Hess R et al. New insights on the mode of action of intrauterine contraceptive devices in women. Fertil Steril. 1988;49;768-73.

American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Statement on IUD and Infertility. Washington. 1985;10:1444-5.

Grafenberg E. Third Congress of World League for Sexual Reforms. London:1929;17-22.

Finch BE, Green H. Contraception through the Ages. London;1963:98-102.

Drife Fo. Handbook of Family Planning, Nancy London, Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone; 1991.

ICMR: Improved utilization of Intrauterine Devices. New Delhi: ICMR; 1989;22-24.

WHO. Intrauterine devices: technical and managerial guidelines for services. Geneva: WHO, 1997. Available from http://www.who.int/iris/handle/10665/41936

Reinprayoon D. Advances in intrauterine device technology. In: Hedon B, Bringer J, Mares P, editors. Fertility and Sterility. A Current Overview. London: Parthenon Publishing Group;1995:31-3.

Tatum HJ, Connell EB. A decade of intrauterine contraception: 1976 to 1986. Fertil Steril. 1986;46:173.

Muthihir JT, Iranloye T, Uduagbgbamen PFK. How long do women use the intrauterine device in Jos Nigeria? J Med Trop. 2005;7(2):13-9.

Oguanuo TC, Anolue FC, Ezegwui HU. Norplant contraception in the University of Nigeria Teaching Hospital Enugu: a six year review. J Coll Med. 2001;6(2):94-7.

Ameh N, Sule ST. Contraceptive choices among women in Zaria, Nigeria. Niger J Clin Pract. 2007;10(3):205-7.

Family Planning in Nigeria. Demographic and Health Survey: Cleveland (MD): National Population Commission and Orc Macro. 2004:61-81.

Burkman RT. The relationship of genital tract Actinomycetes and the development of pelvic inflammatory disease. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1982;143:585.

Burkman RT. Association between intrauterine device and pelvic inflammatory device. Obstet Gynecol. 1981;57(3):269-76.

Sivin I, Stern J. Health during prolonged use of levonorgestrel 20 micrograms/d and the copper T Cu 380Ag intrauterine contraceptive devices: a multicentre study. International Committee for Contraception Research (ICCR). Fertil Steril. 1981;36:159.

Van Os WAA. Intrauterine devices. In Studd J, editor. Progress in Obstetrics and Gynecology: 3rd ed. London: Churchill - Livingstone;1983;3:294-6.

Farr G. New development in intrauterine devices. Netw Res Triangle Park NC. 1991;12(2):9.

Couthino EM, Hanson de Moura L. New leads in contraceptive research. Trop J Obstet Gynaecol. 1994;11(1)36-40.

Downloads

Published

2017-04-27

Issue

Section

Original Research Articles