Literature DB >> 30095777

Effectiveness of Fertility Awareness-Based Methods for Pregnancy Prevention: A Systematic Review.

Rachel Peragallo Urrutia1, Chelsea B Polis, Elizabeth T Jensen, Margaret E Greene, Emily Kennedy, Joseph B Stanford.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To summarize best available prospective data on typical and perfect use effectiveness of fertility awareness-based methods for avoiding pregnancy. DATA SOURCES: We conducted a systematic review of studies published in English, Spanish, French, or German by June 2017 in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: We reviewed 8,755 unique citations and included 53 studies that contained 50 or greater women using a specific fertility awareness-based method to avoid pregnancy, calculated life table pregnancy probabilities or Pearl rates, and prospectively measured pregnancy intentions and outcomes. We systematically evaluated study quality. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND
RESULTS: Of 53 included studies, we ranked 0 high quality, 21 moderate quality, and 32 low quality for our question of interest. Among moderate-quality studies, first-year typical use pregnancy rates or probabilities per 100 woman-years varied widely: 11.2-14.1 for the Standard Days Method, 13.7 for the TwoDay Method, 10.5-33.6 for the Billings Ovulation Method, 4-18.5 for the Marquette Mucus-only Method, 9.0-9.8 for basal body temperature methods, 13.2 for single-check symptothermal methods, 11.2-33.0 for Thyma double-check symptothermal methods, 1.8 for Sensiplan, 25.6 for Persona, 2-6.8 for the Marquette Monitor-only Method, and 6-7 for the Marquette Monitor and Mucus Method. First-year perfect use pregnancy rates or probabilities among moderate-quality studies were 4.8 for the Standard Days Method, 3.5 for the TwoDay Method, 1.1-3.4 for the Billings Ovulation Method, 2.7 for the Marquette Mucus Method, 0.4 for Sensiplan, 12.1 for Persona, and 0 for the Marquette Monitor.
CONCLUSION: Studies on the effectiveness of each fertility awareness-based method are few and of low to moderate quality. Pregnancy rates or probabilities varied widely across different fertility awareness-based methods (and in some cases, within method types), even after excluding low-quality studies. Variability across populations studied precludes comparisons across methods.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30095777     DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000002784

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0029-7844            Impact factor:   7.661


  16 in total

1.  Natural Family Planning, An Option in Reproductive Healthcare: A Qualitative Study on Clinicians' Perceptions.

Authors:  Ozoemena Joan Ibeziako
Journal:  Linacre Q       Date:  2022-03-27

2.  Maternity After Orthotopic Liver Transplantation: Can the Use of Biological Fertility Indicators Help? Our Own Experience and Literature-based Recommendations.

Authors:  Antonio Castillo; María Eugenia Huete; Tania Errasti; Guillermo Pérez de Lema
Journal:  Linacre Q       Date:  2022-01-10

Review 3.  Fertility Awareness-Based Methods for Women's Health and Family Planning.

Authors:  Marguerite Duane; Joseph B Stanford; Christina A Porucznik; Pilar Vigil
Journal:  Front Med (Lausanne)       Date:  2022-05-24

4.  What About Methods for Men? A Qualitative Analysis of Attitudes Toward Male Contraception in Burkina Faso and Uganda.

Authors:  Alice F Cartwright; Anna Lawton; Aurélie Brunie; Rebecca L Callahan
Journal:  Int Perspect Sex Reprod Health       Date:  2020-09-25

5.  The Use of NFP When Pregnancy Is Contraindicated?

Authors:  Justo Aznar; Julio Tudela
Journal:  Linacre Q       Date:  2020-02-11

6.  Anthropological and Methodical Differences of Natural Family Planning and Fertility Awareness-based Methods.

Authors:  Birutė Obelenienė; Andrius Narbekovas; Jonas Juškevičius
Journal:  Linacre Q       Date:  2019-11-22

7.  Multisite Effectiveness Study of the Marquette Method of Natural Family Planning Program.

Authors:  Qiyan Mu; Richard J Fehring; Thomas Bouchard
Journal:  Linacre Q       Date:  2020-09-27

8.  Types of Lifetime Reproductive Coercion and Current Contraceptive Use.

Authors:  Izidora Skracic; Amy B Lewin; Julia R Steinberg
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2021-01-06       Impact factor: 3.017

9.  Contraception in the Era of COVID-19.

Authors:  Kavita Nanda; Elena Lebetkin; Markus J Steiner; Irina Yacobson; Laneta J Dorflinger
Journal:  Glob Health Sci Pract       Date:  2020-06-30

Review 10.  CE: An Evidence-Based Update on Contraception.

Authors:  Laura E Britton; Amy Alspaugh; Madelyne Z Greene; Monica R McLemore
Journal:  Am J Nurs       Date:  2020-02       Impact factor: 2.577

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.