A review of barriers and myths preventing the more widespread use of intrauterine contraception in nulliparous women

European Journal of Contraception and Reproductive Health Care

Volumn 17, Issue 5, 2012, Pages 340-350

  Black, Kirsten ^a   Lotke, Pamela ^b   Buhling, Kai J ^c   Zite, Nikki B ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER HAMBURG EPPENDORF   (Germany)

^d UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Intrauterine contraception; Intrauterine device; Intrauterine system; LNG IUS; Nulliparous

Indexed keywords

AZITHROMYCIN; DOXYCYCLINE;

ANTIBIOTIC PROPHYLAXIS; ANTIBIOTIC THERAPY; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; AWARENESS; CANCER SCREENING; CHLAMYDIASIS; COMPREHENSION; CONTRACEPTION; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DEVICE SAFETY; ECTOPIC PREGNANCY; HEALTH CARE; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL; HUMAN; INFECTION RISK; INTRAUTERINE CONTRACEPTIVE DEVICE; NULLIPARA; PAPANICOLAOU TEST; PATIENT SAFETY; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PELVIC INFLAMMATORY DISEASE; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; SALPINGITIS; SEXUALLY TRANSMITTED DISEASE; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER;

ADULT; ATTITUDE OF HEALTH PERSONNEL; CONTRACEPTIVE AGENTS, FEMALE; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; FEMALE; HEALTH KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES, PRACTICE; HUMANS; INFERTILITY, FEMALE; INTRAUTERINE DEVICES; MYTHOLOGY; PARITY; PHYSICIAN'S PRACTICE PATTERNS; PREGNANCY; PRIMARY HEALTH CARE; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RISK FACTORS;

EID: 84866241765     PISSN: 13625187     EISSN: 14730782     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3109/13625187.2012.700744     Document Type: Review

References (65)

1. Jones RK, Darroch JE, Henshaw S K. Contraceptive use among U.S. women having abortions in 2000-2001. Perspect Sex Reprod Health 2002 ; 34 : 294-303 . (Pubitemid 36061240)
2. Moreau C, Trussell J, Rodriguez G, et al. Contraceptive failure rates in France: Results from a population-based survey. Hum Reprod 2007 ; 22 : 2422-7. reversible contraception: Implants and intrauterine devices. Obstet Gynecol 2011 ; 118 : 184-96 . (Pubitemid 47289056)
3. Mavranezouli I, LARC G uideline Development Group. The cost-effectiveness of long-acting reversible contraceptive methods in the UK: Analysis based on a decision-analytic model developed for a National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) clinical practice guideline. Hum Reprod 2008 ; 23 : 1338-45 . (Pubitemid 351770574)
4. Trussell J, Lalla AM, Doan QV, et al. Cost effectiveness of contraceptives in the United States. Contraception 2009 ; 79 : 5-14 .
5. United Nations. World contraceptive use, 2011. Accessed April 2011 from: http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/contraceptive2011/ contraceptive2011.htm
6. Finer LB, Zolner M R. Unintended pregnancy in the United States: Incidence and disparities, 2006. Contraception 2011 ; 84 : 478-85 .
7. Richters J, Grulich AE, de Visser RO, et al. Sex in Australia: Contraceptive practices among a representative sample of women. Aust N Z J Public Health 2003 ; 27 : 210-6 . (Pubitemid 36526894)
8. Grimes D. Intrauterine device and upper-genital-tract infection. Lancet 2000 ; 356 : 1013-9 .
9. Byrne K. Medical records in litigation: The Dalkon Shield story. AMRO 1992 ; 32 : 11-4 .
10. Stubbs E, Schamp A. The evidence is in. Why are IUDs still out?: Family physicians perceptions of risk and indications. Can Fam Physician 2008 ; 54 : 560-6 . (Pubitemid 351554056)
11. World Health Organization. Medical eligibility criteria for contraceptive use, 4th edn. Geneva: WHO 2010. Accessed 12 April 2012 from: http://www.who.int/reproductive health/publications/mec.pdf
12. MacIsaac L, Espey E. Intrauterine contraception: The pendulum swings back. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am 2007 ; 34 : 91-111 . (Pubitemid 46661897)
13. Stanwood NL, Garrett JM, Konrad TR. Obstetriciangynecologists and the intrauterine device: A survey of attitudes and practice. Obstet Gynecol 2002 ; 99 : 275-80 . (Pubitemid 34114001)
14. Lyus R, Lohr P, Prager S, Board of the Society of Family Planning. Use of the MirenalNG-IUS and Paragard CuT380A intrauterine devices in nulliparous women. Contraception 2010 ; 81 : 367-71 .
15. Allen RH, Goldberg AB, Grimes DA. Expanding access to intrauterine contraception. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2009 ; 201 : 456 .e1-5.
16. Middleton AJ, Naish J, Singer N. General practitionersviews on the use of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system in young, nulligravid women, in London, UK. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care 2011 ; 16 : 311-8 .
17. Harper CC, Blum M, de Bocanegra HT, et al. Challenges in translating evidenceto practice: the provision of intrauterine contraception. Obstet Gynecol 2008 ; 111 : 1359-69 .
18. Farley TM, Rosenberg MJ, Rowe PJ, et al. Intrauterine devices and pelvic infl ammatory disease: An international perspective. Lancet 1992 ; 339 : 785-8 .
19. Hubacher D, Lara-Ricalde R, Taylor DJ, et al. Use of copper intrauterine devices and the risk of tubal infertility among nulligravid women. N Engl J Med 2001 ; 345 : 561-7 . (Pubitemid 32772097)
20. Walsh T, Grimes D, Frezieres R, et al. Randomised controlled trial of prophylactic antibiotics before insertion of intrauterine devices. IUD Study Group. Lancet 1998 ; 351 : 1005-8 . (Pubitemid 28154375)
21. Sinei SK, Schulz KF, Lamptey PR, et al. Preventing IUCD-related pelvic infection: The effi cacy of prophylactic doxycycline at insertion. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1990 ; 97 : 412-19 . (Pubitemid 20189989)
22. Grimes DA, Schulz K F. Antibiotic prophylaxis for intrauterine contraceptive device insertion. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2001 ;( 2 ): CD001327 .
23. Skjeldestad FE, Halvorsen LE, Kahn H, et al. IUD users in Norway are at low risk for genital C. trachomatis infection. Contraception 1996 ; 54 : 209-12 . (Pubitemid 26398616)
24. James NJ, Wilson S, Hughes S. A pilot study to incorporate chlamydial testing in the management of women anticipating IUD insertion in community clinics. Br J Fam Plann 1997 ; 23 : 16-19 .
25. Pap-Akeson M, Solheim F, Thorbert G, et al. Genital tract infections associated with the intrauterine contraceptive device can be reduced by inserting thethreads into the uterine cavity. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1992 ; 99 : 676-9 .
26. Faundes A, Telles E, Cristofoletti ML, et al. The risk of inadvertent intrauterine device insertion in women carriers of endocervical Chlamydia trachomatis. Contraception 1998 ; 58 : 105-9 . (Pubitemid 28449364)
27. Toivonen J, Luukkainen T, Allonen H. Protective effect of intrauterine release of levonorgestrel on pelvic infection: Three years comparative experience of levonorgestrel-and copper-releasing intrauterine devices. Obstet Gynecol 1991 ; 77 : 261-4 .
28. Rubin SE, Fletcher J, Stein T, et al. Determinants of intrauterine contraception provision among US family physicians: A national survey of knowledge, attitudes and practice. Contraception 2011 ; 83 : 472-8 .
29. Vessey MP. Contraception for women. Intrauterine devices and ectopic pregnancy. BMJ 2009 ; 339 : b3864 .
30. Xiong X, Buekens P, Wollast E. IUD use and the risk of ectopic pregnancy: A metaanalysis of case-control studies. Contraception 1995 ; 52 : 23-34 .
31. Skjeldestad F E. How effectively do copper intrauterine devices prevent ectopic pregnancy? Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1997 ; 76 : 684-90 . (Pubitemid 27344726)
32. Petersen KR, Brooks L, Jacobsen B, Skouby S O. Intrauterine devices in nulliparous women. Adv Contracept 1991 ; 7 : 333-8 .
33. Zhou L, Harrison-Woolrych M, Coulter DM. Use of the New Zealand Intensive Medicines Monitoring Programmeto study the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device (Mirena). Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2003 ; 12 : 371-7 . (Pubitemid 36903371)
34. Bahamondes MV, Hidalgo MM, Bahamondes L, Monteiro I. Ease of insertion and clinical performance of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system in nulligravidas. Contraception 2011 ; 84 : e11-6 .
35. Marions L, Lovkvist L, Taube A, et al. Use of the levonorgestrel releasing-intrauterine system in nulliparous women-a non-interventional study in Sweden. Eur J Contracep Reprod Health Care 2011 ; 16 : 126-34 .
36. Suhonen S, Haukkamaa M, Jakobsson T, Rauramo I. Clinical performance of alevonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system and oral contraceptives in young nulliparous women: A comparative study. Contraception 2004 ; 69 : 407-12 . (Pubitemid 38510332)
37. Hubacher D, Reyes V, Lillo S, et al. Pain from copper intrauterine device insertion: Randomized trial of prophylactic ibuprofen. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2006 ; 195 : 1272-7 . (Pubitemid 44635393)
38. Saav I, Aronsson A, Marions L, et al. Cervical priming with sublingual misoprostol prior to insertion of an intrauterine device in nulliparous women: A randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod 2007 ; 22 : 2647-52 . (Pubitemid 47434207)
39. Allen RH, Bartz D, Grimes DA, et al. Interventions for pain with intrauterine device insertion. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009 ;( 3 ): CD007373 .
40. Caliskan E, Ozturk N, Dilbaz BO, Dilbaz S. Analysis of risk factors associated with uterine perforation by intrauterine devices. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care 2003 ; 8 : 150-5 . (Pubitemid 37372408)
41. Andersson K, Ryde-Blomqvist E, Lindell K, et al. Perforations with intrauterine devices. Report from a Swedish survey. Contraception 1998 ; 57 : 251-5 . (Pubitemid 28280914)
42. Harrison-Woolrych M, A shton J, Coulter D. Uterine perforation on intrauterine device insertion: Is the incidence higher than previously reported? Contraception 2003 ; 67 : 53-6 . (Pubitemid 36084289)
43. B rockmeyer A, Kishen M, Webb A. Experience of IUD/IUS insertions and clinical performance in nulliparous women-a pilot study. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care 2008 ; 13 : 248-54 .
44. Veldhuis HM, Vos AG, Lagro-Janssen ALM. Complications of the intrauterine device in nulliparous and parous women. Eur J Gen Pract 2004 ; 10 : 82-7 . (Pubitemid 39307183)
45. Madden T, McNicholas C, Secura G, et al. Rates of continuation and expulsion of intrauterine contraception at 12 months in nulliparous and adolescent women. Contraception 2010 ; 82 : 187-8 .
46. Sivin I. IUDs are contraceptives, not abortifacients: A comment on research and belief. Stud Fam Plann 1989 ; 20 : 355-9 .
47. Hubacher D. The checkered history and bright future of intrauterine contraception in the United States. Perspect Sex Reprod Health 2002 ; 34 : 98-103 . (Pubitemid 36182032)
48. Rivera R, Y acobson I, Grimes D. The mechanism of action of hormonal contraceptives and intrauterine contraceptive devices. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999 ; 181(5 Pt 1) : 1263-9 .
49. World Health Organization. Mechanism of action, safety and effi cacy of intrauterine devices. Report of a WHO Scientifi c Group. World Health Organ Tech Rep Ser 1987 ; 753 : 1-91 .
50. Wilcox AJ, Weinberg CR, Armstrong EG, et al. Urinary human chorionic gonadotropin among intrauterine device users: Detection with a highly specifi c and sensitive assay. Fertil Steril 1987 ; 47 : 265-9. (Pubitemid 17024507)
51. Wilcox AJ, Weinberg CR, Wehmann RE, et al. Measuring early pregnancy loss: Laboratory and fi eld methods. Fertil Steril 1985 ; 44 : 366-74 . (Pubitemid 15232337)
52. Oritz ME, Croxatto HB. Copper-T intrauterine device and levonorgestrel intrauterine system: Biological bases of their mechanism of action. Contraception 2007 ; 75 (suppl.): S16-30 . (Pubitemid 46770712)
53. Lewis RA, Taylor D, Natavio MF, et al. Effects of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system on cervical mucus quality and sperm penetrability. Contraception 2010 ; 82 : 491-6 .
54. Schulman L, H ess HM, A rias R, et al. Expert Roundtable. Intrauterine contraception: Patient and clinician considerations. OBG Management 2009 ; July(Supplement) : S1-8. Lancet Oncology 2011 ; 12 : 1023-31 .
55. Fleming KL, Sokoloff A, RainetR. Attitudes and beliefs about the intrauterine device among teenagers and young women. Contraception 2010 ; 82 : 178-82 .
56. Whitaker AK, Johnson LM, Harwood B, et al. Adolescent and young adult women s knowledge of and attitudes toward the intrauterine device. Contraception 2008 ; 78 : 211-7 .
57. Rubin SE, Winrob I. Urban female family medicine patients perceptions about intrauterine contraception. J Womens Health (Larchmt) 2010 ; 19 : 735-40 .
58. Bateson D, Harvey C, Williams J, Black K I. Intrauterine contraception: Why are so few Australian women using this effective method? Med J Aust 2011 ; 194 : 324 .
59. Hladky K, Allsworth J, Madden T, et al. Womens knowledge about intrauterine contraception. Obstet Gynecol 2011 ; 117 : 48-54 .
60. Peipert J, Zhao Q, Allsworth J, et al. Continuation and satisfaction of reversible contraception. Obstet Gynecol 2011 ; 117 : 1105-13 .
61. Nilsson CG, Luukkainen T, Diaz J, Allonen H. Clinical performance of a new levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device. A randomized comparison with a Nova-T-copper device. Contraception 1982 ; 25 : 345-56 . (Pubitemid 12114449)
62. Andersson K, Odlind V, Rybo G. Levonorgestrelreleasing and copper-releasing (Nova T) IUDs during fi ve years of use: A randomized comparativetrial. Contraception 1994 ; 49 : 56-72 . (Pubitemid 24077388)
63. Teal SB, Sheeder J. IUD use in adolescent mothers: Retention, failure and reasons for discontinuation. Contraception 2012 ; 85 : 270-4 .
64. Kittur ND, S ecura GM, Peipert JF, et al. Comparison of contraceptive use between the Contraceptive CHOICE Project and state and national data. Contraception 2011 ; 83 : 479-85 .
65. Association of Reproductive Health Professionals. Use of intrauterine contraception in the United States. ARHP Clinical Proceedings: New Developments in intrauterine contraception September 2004 : 3-6