A survey to assess knowledge and acceptability of the intrauterine device in the Family Planning Services in Cape Town, South Africa

Journal of Family Planning and Reproductive Health Care

Volumn 36, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 73-78

  Van Zijl, Shelsley ^a   Morroni, Chelsea ^a   Van Der Spuy, Zephne M ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CAPE TOWN   (South Africa)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CAPE TOWN   (South Africa)

Author keywords

Acceptability; Intrauterine device; Knowledge; South Africa; Survey

Indexed keywords

ANTIBIOTIC AGENT; ORAL CONTRACEPTIVE AGENT;

ADULT; AFRICA; AMENORRHEA; ANTIBIOTIC PROPHYLAXIS; CONDOM; CONTRACEPTION; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY; DYSMENORRHEA; FAMILY PLANNING; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTRAUTERINE CONTRACEPTIVE DEVICE; KNOWLEDGE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MENSTRUATION; PELVIC INFLAMMATORY DISEASE; PREGNANCY TERMINATION; REVIEW; STRUCTURED QUESTIONNAIRE; VAGINITIS;

ADULT; ATTITUDE OF HEALTH PERSONNEL; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; FAMILY PLANNING SERVICES; FEMALE; HEALTH KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES, PRACTICE; HUMANS; INTRAUTERINE DEVICES; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT ACCEPTANCE OF HEALTH CARE; SOUTH AFRICA; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 77951787411     PISSN: 14711893     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1783/147118910791069367     Document Type: Review

References (23)

1. Mishell DR. Intrauterine devices: mechanisms of action, safety, and efficacy. Contraception 1998; 58: 45S-53S.
2. Grimes DA. Intrauterine device and upper-genital-tract infection. Lancet 2000; 356: 1013-1019.
3. Hubacher D, Lara-Ricalde R, Taylor DJ, Guerra-Infante F, Guzman-Rodriguez R. Use of copper intrauterine devices and the risk of tubal infertility among nulligravid women. N Engl J Med 2001; 345: 561-567. (Pubitemid 32772097)
4. Morrison CS, Sekadde-Kigondu C, Sinei SK, Weiner DH, Kwok C, Kokonya D. Is the intrauterine device appropriate contraception for HIV-1-infected women? Br J Obstet Gynaecol 2001; 108: 784-790. (Pubitemid 32695308)
5. World Health Organization (WHO). Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use (3rd edn). 2004. http://apps.who.int/rhl/fertility/ contraception/mec.pdf [Accessed 12 October 2009].
6. United Nations. World Contraceptive Use 2007. Washington, DC: Department of Economic and Social Affairs: Population Division, 2007. http://www.un.org/ esa/population/publications/contraceptive2007WallChart-WCU2007-Data.xls [Accessed 12 October 2009].
7. Salem R. Population Reports: New Attention to the IUD: Expanding Women's Contraceptive Options to Meet Their Needs. The Info Project. Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Series B (7): XXX111 (2). http://www.populationreports.org/b7/ [Accessed 12 October 2009].
8. Katz KR, Johnson LM, Janowitz B, Carranza JM. Reasons for the low level of IUD use in El Salvador. Int Fam Plan Perspect 2002; 28: 26-31.
9. Stanwood NL, Garrett JM, Konrad TR. Obstetrician-gynecologists and the intrauterine device: a survey of attitudes and practice. Obstet Gynecol 2002; 99: 275-280. (Pubitemid 34114001)
10. Brambila C, Taracena B. Availability and Acceptability of IUDs in Guatemala. 2003. http://www.popcouncil.org/pdfs/frontiers/FR-FinalReports/ Guatemala-IUD.pdf [Accessed 12 October 2009].
11. Gyapong J, Addico G, Osei I, Abbey M, Kobinah DA, Agyarko HO, et al. An Assessment of Trends in the Use of the IUD in Ghana. 2003. http://www. popcouncil.org/pdfs/frontiers/FR-FinalReports/Ghana-IUD.pdf [Accessed 12 October 2009]
12. Department of Health. Contraception and fertility preferences (Chapter 4). South African Demographic and Health Survey, 1998. http://www.doh.gov.za/ facts/1998/sadhs98/chapter4.pdf [Accessed 12 October 2009].
13. Department of Health. II: Reproductive Health. South African Demographic and Health Survey. Preliminary Report, Part One. 2004. http://www.doh.gov.za/ facts/index.html (select: South African Demographic and Health Survey - 2003) [Accessed 12 October 2009].
14. Glasier AF, Smith KB, van der Spuy ZM, Ho PC, Cheng L, Dada K, et al. Amenorrhea associated with contraception - an international study on acceptability. Contraception 2003; 67: 1-8. (Pubitemid 36084280)
15. Glasier AF, Smith KB, Cheng L, Ho PC, van der Spuy Z, Baird DT. An international study on the acceptability of a once-a-month pill. Hum Reprod 1999; 14: 3018-3020.
16. Department of Health. National Contraception Policy Guidelines. 2001. http://www.doh.gov.za/docs/index.html (select: Fact Sheets/Guidelines; Miscellaneous; National Contraception Policy Guidelines - Part 1 and Part 2) [Accessed 12 October 2009].
17. StataCorp. Stata Statistical Software: Release 8.0. College Station, TX: Stata Corporation, 2003.
18. Forrest JD. US women's perceptions of and attitudes about the IUD. Obstet Gynecol Surv 1996; 51: S30-S34.
19. Gilliam ML, Warden M, Goldstein C, Tapia B. Concerns about contraceptive side effects among young Latinas: a focus-group approach. Contraception 2004; 70: 299-305.
20. Asker C, Stokes-Lampard H, Beavan J, Wilson S. What is it about intrauterine devices that women find unacceptable? Factors that make women non-users: a qualitative study. J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care. 2006; 32: 89-94.
21. Guillebaud J. Intrauterine devices. In: Guillebaud J, Contraception: Your Questions Answered (4th edn). Edinburgh, UK: Churchill Livingstone, 2004; 357-450.
22. Rinehart W. WHO Updates Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptives: Info Reports. The Info Project. Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. 2004; 1: 1-8. http://info.k4health.org/inforeports/mec/mec.pdf [Accessed 12 October 2009].
23. Western Cape Provincial Government: Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning. Census 1996 & 2001: Provincial Population Statistics in the Western Cape. 2006. http://www.capegateway.gov.za/other/2006/ 6/wc-census-1996-&-2001-population-optimised2.pdf [Accessed 12 October 2009].