Literature DB >> 28218963

Women's willingness and ability to feel the strings of their intrauterine device.

Juliana Melo1, Mary Tschann2, Reni Soon2, Melissa Kuwahara2, Bliss Kaneshiro2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine how many intrauterine device (IUD) users are willing and able to palpate their IUD strings.
METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted among IUD users presenting for their 6-week follow-up visit after insertion at the University of Hawaii, USA, between January 2011 and January 2012. Participants were asked whether they had previously felt the strings and whether they were willing to do so during the visit. Bivariate analyses and multiple logistic regression were performed.
RESULTS: Previous attempts to palpate IUD strings were reported by 74 (58.7%) of 126 participants, of whom 49 (66.2%) could feel the strings. At the study visit, 60 (47.6%) participants were willing to try to feel their strings; 33 (55.0%) were successful. Overall, 58 (46.0%) participants were willing and able to palpate their IUD strings at home and/or at the study visit. Fewer women who self-identified as native Hawaiian than women of other races reported previous attempts (P=0.005). Previous instruction to check IUD strings was associated with willingness to palpate them before and after controlling for native Hawaiian race (odds ratio 8.78, 95% CI 3.43-22.43; adjusted odds ratio 9.64, 95% CI 3.57-26.04).
CONCLUSION: Approximately half the participants were willing and able to palpate their IUD strings. Routinely counseling women to check their IUD strings could have limited clinical utility.
© 2017 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Contraceptive management; Follow-up; IUD strings; Intrauterine device; Long-acting reversible contraception

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28218963      PMCID: PMC5584634          DOI: 10.1002/ijgo.12130

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Gynaecol Obstet        ISSN: 0020-7292            Impact factor:   3.561


  14 in total

1.  What is it about intrauterine devices that women find unacceptable? Factors that make women non-users: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Claire Asker; Helen Stokes-Lampard; Jackie Beavan; Sue Wilson
Journal:  J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care       Date:  2006-04

2.  Three-year efficacy and safety of a new 52-mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system.

Authors:  David L Eisenberg; Courtney A Schreiber; David K Turok; Stephanie B Teal; Carolyn L Westhoff; Mitchell D Creinin
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2015-04-28       Impact factor: 3.375

3.  Committee opinion no. 539: adolescents and long-acting reversible contraception: implants and intrauterine devices.

Authors: 
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 7.661

4.  Interest in and experience with IUD self-removal.

Authors:  Diana Greene Foster; Daniel Grossman; David K Turok; Jeffrey F Peipert; Linda Prine; Courtney A Schreiber; Andrea V Jackson; Rana E Barar; Eleanor Bimla Schwarz
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2014-02-07       Impact factor: 3.375

5.  Long-term contraception with the levonorgestrel 20 mcg/day (LNg 20) and the copper T 380Ag intrauterine devices: a five-year randomized study.

Authors:  I Sivin; S el Mahgoub; T McCarthy; D R Mishell; D Shoupe; F Alvarez; V Brache; E Jimenez; J Diaz; A Faundes
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  1990-10       Impact factor: 3.375

6.  Risk of uterine perforation with levonorgestrel-releasing and copper intrauterine devices in the European Active Surveillance Study on Intrauterine Devices.

Authors:  Klaas Heinemann; Suzanne Reed; Sabine Moehner; Thai Do Minh
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2015-01-16       Impact factor: 3.375

7.  Knowledge and attitudes about long-acting reversible contraception among Latina women who desire sterilization.

Authors:  Kari White; Kristine Hopkins; Joseph E Potter; Daniel Grossman
Journal:  Womens Health Issues       Date:  2013 Jul-Aug

8.  Association of age and parity with intrauterine device expulsion.

Authors:  Tessa Madden; Colleen McNicholas; Qiuhong Zhao; Gina M Secura; David L Eisenberg; Jeffrey F Peipert
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 7.661

9.  Changes in use of long-acting contraceptive methods in the United States, 2007-2009.

Authors:  Lawrence B Finer; Jenna Jerman; Megan L Kavanaugh
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2012-07-13       Impact factor: 7.329

10.  Current Contraceptive Use and Variation by Selected Characteristics Among Women Aged 15-44: United States, 2011-2013.

Authors:  Kimberly Daniels; Jill Daugherty; Jo Jones; William Mosher
Journal:  Natl Health Stat Report       Date:  2015-11-10
View more
  6 in total

1.  Six-month expulsion of postplacental copper intrauterine devices placed after vaginal delivery.

Authors:  Elizabeth P Gurney; Sarita Sonalkar; Arden McAllister; Mary D Sammel; Courtney A Schreiber
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2018-06-02       Impact factor: 8.661

2.  Management of an Intrauterine Device Migration Resulting in a Pregnancy - Clinical Case.

Authors:  Mona Akad; Didier Tardif; Akad Fawzy; Razvan V Socolov
Journal:  Maedica (Bucur)       Date:  2020-12

3.  Intrauterine device migration into the lumen of large bowel: A case report.

Authors:  Vygintas Aliukonis; Marius Lasinskas; Algirdas Pilvelis; Audrius Gradauskas
Journal:  Int J Surg Case Rep       Date:  2020-06-12

4.  IUD self-removal as self-care: Research is needed in low and middle-income countries.

Authors:  Alice F Cartwright; Amelia C L Mackenzie; Rebecca L Callahan; M Valeria Bahamondes; Laneta J Dorflinger
Journal:  Front Glob Womens Health       Date:  2022-09-07

Review 5.  Migration of a foreign body to the rectum: A case report and literature review.

Authors:  Hui Ye; Shujuan Huang; Qichang Zhou; Jie Yu; Changlei Xi; Longlei Cao; Peiyun Wang; Zhilin Gong
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2018-07       Impact factor: 1.889

6.  Chronic nodules of sigmoid perforation caused by incarcerated intrauterine contraception device.

Authors:  Xiaohui Huang; Rui Zhong; Liqin Zeng; Xuhui He; Qingshan Deng; Xiuhong Peng; Jieming Li; Xiping Luo
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2019-01       Impact factor: 1.817

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.