Literature DB >> 22979954

Failed IUD insertions in community practice: an under-recognized problem?

Amna I Dermish1, David K Turok, Janet C Jacobson, Marie E S Flores, Molly McFadden, Kathy Burke.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The data analysis was conducted to describe the rate of unsuccessful copper T380A intrauterine device (IUD) insertions among women using the IUD for emergency contraception (EC) at community family planning clinics in Utah.
METHODS: These data were obtained from a prospective observational trial of women choosing the copper T380A IUD for EC. Insertions were performed by nurse practitioners at two family planning clinics in order to generalize findings to the type of service setting most likely to employ this intervention. Adjuvant measures to facilitate difficult IUD insertions (cervical anesthesia, dilation, pain medication, and use of ultrasound guidance) were not utilized. The effect of parity on IUD insertion success was determined using exact logistic regression models adjusted for individual practitioner failure rates.
RESULTS: Six providers performed 197 IUD insertion attempts. These providers had a mean of 14.1 years of experience (range 1-27, S.D. ±12.5). Among nulliparous women, 27 of 138 (19.6%) IUD insertions were unsuccessful. In parous women, 8 of 59 IUD insertions were unsuccessful (13.6%). The adjusted odds ratio (aOR) showed that IUD insertion failure was more likely in nulliparous women compared to parous women (aOR=2.31, 95% CI 0.90-6.52, p=.09).
CONCLUSION: The high rate of unsuccessful IUD insertions reported here, particularly for nulliparous women, suggests that the true insertion failure rate of providers who are not employing additional tools for difficult insertions may be much higher than reported in clinical trials. Further investigation is necessary to determine if this is a common problem and, if so, to assess if the use of adjuvant measures will reduce the number of unsuccessful IUD insertions.
Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22979954      PMCID: PMC4082821          DOI: 10.1016/j.contraception.2012.06.015

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Contraception        ISSN: 0010-7824            Impact factor:   3.375


  25 in total

1.  Use of the Mirena LNG-IUS and Paragard CuT380A intrauterine devices in nulliparous women.

Authors:  Richard Lyus; Patricia Lohr; Sarah Prager
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2010-02-19       Impact factor: 3.375

2.  Cervical softening with vaginal misoprostol before intrauterine device insertion.

Authors:  Y T Li; T C Kuo; L C Kuan; Y C Chu
Journal:  Int J Gynaecol Obstet       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 3.561

3.  ACOG Committee Opinion No. 392, December 2007. Intrauterine device and adolescents.

Authors: 
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 7.661

4.  Double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study on the effect of misoprostol on ease of consecutive insertion of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system.

Authors:  Oskari Heikinheimo; Pirjo Inki; Michael Kunz; Sule Parmhed; Anna-Maija Anttila; Sven-Eric Olsson; Ritva Hurskainen; Kristina Gemzell-Danielsson
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2010-03-01       Impact factor: 3.375

5.  Experience of IUD/IUS insertions and clinical performance in nulliparous women--a pilot study.

Authors:  Andrea Brockmeyer; Meera Kishen; Anne Webb
Journal:  Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 1.848

6.  Vaginal misoprostol prior to insertion of an intrauterine device: an RCT.

Authors:  Kirsten Dijkhuizen; Olaf M Dekkers; Cas A G Holleboom; Christianne J M de Groot; Bart W J Hellebrekers; Godelieve J J van Roosmalen; Catharina A H Janssen; Frans M Helmerhorst
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2010-12-15       Impact factor: 6.918

7.  Use of contraception in the United States: 1982-2008.

Authors:  William D Mosher; Jo Jones
Journal:  Vital Health Stat 23       Date:  2010-08

8.  Complications of the intrauterine device in nulliparous and parous women.

Authors:  H M Veldhuis; A G Vos; A L M Lagro-Janssen
Journal:  Eur J Gen Pract       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 1.904

9.  ACOG Committee Opinion no. 450: Increasing use of contraceptive implants and intrauterine devices to reduce unintended pregnancy.

Authors: 
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 7.661

10.  Cervical priming with sublingual misoprostol prior to insertion of an intrauterine device in nulliparous women: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  I Sääv; A Aronsson; L Marions; O Stephansson; K Gemzell-Danielsson
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2007-07-25       Impact factor: 6.918

View more
  4 in total

1.  Emergency contraception with a copper IUD or oral levonorgestrel: an observational study of 1-year pregnancy rates.

Authors:  David K Turok; Janet C Jacobson; Amna I Dermish; Sara E Simonsen; Shawn Gurtcheff; Molly McFadden; Patricia A Murphy
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2013-11-22       Impact factor: 3.375

2.  Choice of Emergency Contraceptive and Decision Making Regarding Subsequent Unintended Pregnancy.

Authors:  Pamela A Royer; David K Turok; Jessica N Sanders; Hanna M Saltzman
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2016-03-31       Impact factor: 2.681

Review 3.  Practical Advice for Emergency IUD Contraception in Young Women.

Authors:  Norman D Goldstuck; Dirk Wildemeersch
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol Int       Date:  2015-07-29

4.  Intrauterine device quo vadis? Why intrauterine device use should be revisited particularly in nulliparous women?

Authors:  Dirk Wildemeersch; Norman Goldstuck; Thomas Hasskamp; Sohela Jandi; Ansgar Pett
Journal:  Open Access J Contracept       Date:  2015-01-16
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.