A comparative evaluation of post placental intrauterine contraceptive device (IUCD) insertion between normal delivery and caesarean section
Keywords:Intrauterine device, Intracaesarean insertion, Post placental contraception
Background: Adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes are related to pregnancies spaced too closely together. Objective of present study was to compare the expulsion rate and complications between post placental IUCD insertion between caesarean section and vaginal delivery.
Methods: This study was a prospective comparative study conducted in the department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, at Agartala Government Medical College over 1.5 Years (January 2016-June2017) All cases at term pregnancy delivering by caesarean section and vaginal delivery were divided into two different groups. Sample size of 105 in each group. Subjects recruited from-obstetrics OPD and casualty of Agartala Government Medical College (AGMC) and GB Pant Hospital expulsion rate and complications. Comparative evaluation of Expulsion rate and complications following post placental IUCD insertion between caesarean section and vaginal delivery at the end of six months, one year and one and half year.
Results: There was no significant difference in either complications between the two groups (P value-.913) or outcomes (p value-.035). Expulsion rate 18.2% following vaginal delivery compared to those with intracaesarean insertion i.e 3.8%.
Conclusions: The complications associated with postplacental Intrauterine device insertion is insignificant, still the awareness, acceptance and continuation are very low. Therefore Information, education Communication activity by the field workers must be enhanced to overcome this knowledge gap.
Post-Partum IUCD reference manual. New Delhi Family Planning Division, Ministry of Health and family Welfare, Government of India; 2010. Available at http://www.nrhmtn.gov.in/modules/PPIUCD%20Reference%20Manual.pdf
IUCD reference Manual for Medical Officers, Family Planning Division, Ministry of Health and family weldfare, Govt of India;2010:1-20 Available at https://nrhm.gujarat.gov.in/images/pdf/IUCD_Reference_Manual_Nursing_Personnel.pdf
Konar H. DC Dutta”s Textbook of Gynaecology. 7th Ed. Jaypee;2016:92-7.
Mishra S. Evaluation of safety, efficacy and expulsion of postplacental and intracaesarean insertion of intrauterine contraceptive devices. J Obstet Gynaecol India. 2014;64(5):337-43.
Katheit G, Agarwal J. Evaluation of Post-placental Intrauterine Device in terms of awareness, acceptance and expulsions in tertiary care hospital. Int J Reprod Contracept Gynaecol. 2013 Dec;2(4):539-43.
Grimes DA, Lopez LM, Schulz KF, Van Vleit HA, Stanwood NL. Immmediate post-partum insertion of intrauterine devices. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;15:CD003066.
Sukla M, Sabuhi Qureshi C. Post-placental intrauterine device insertion: a five year experience at a tertiary care centre in north India. Indian J Med Res.2012;136(3):432.
Deshpande S, Gadappa S, Yelikar K, Wanjare N, Andurkar S. Awareness, Acceptability and clinical outcome of post-placental insertion of intrauterine contraceptive device in Marathwada region, India. Ind J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2017;4(1):77-82.
Ranjana Verma A, Chawla I. A follow up study of postpartum intrauterine device insertion in a tertiary health centre. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynaecol. 2017;6:2800-5.
Chi IC, Wilkens L, Roger S. Expulsions in immediate postpartum insertion of Lippes Loop D and Copper T IUD’s and their counterpart Delta devices-an epidemiological analysis. Contraception. 1985;32:119-34.
Mohamed SA, Kamel MA, Shaaban OM, Salem HT. Acceptability for the use of postpartum intrauterine contraceptive devices: Assiut experience. Med Princ Pract. 2003;12:170-5.