Search

Background This study aims to determine if women presenting for emergency contraception (EC) at family planning clinics may be interested in using the copper intrauterine device (IUD) for EC. Study Design This convenience sample survey was offered to women who presented for EC at four participating clinics in urban Utah. Anonymous written questionnaires were distributed. The outcome variable of interest was interest in using the copper IUD for EC. Results Of survey respondents, 320 (34.0%) of 941 said they would be interested in an EC method that was long term, highly effective and reversible. Interested women were not significantly different from noninterested women in relation to age, marital status, education, household income, gravidity, previous abortions, previous sexually transmitted infections (STIs) or relationship status. One hundred twenty women (37.5% of those interested or 12.8% of all those surveyed) would wait an hour, undergo a pelvic exam to get the method and would still want the method knowing it was an IUD. However, only 12.3% of these women could also pay $350 or more for the device. Multivariable regression found the following predictors of interest in the IUD among EC users: non-Hispanic minorities (OR=2.12, 95% CI=1.14–3.93), desire to never be pregnant in the future (OR=2.87, 95% CI=1.38–5.66) and interest in adoption (OR=1.96, 95% CI=1.00–5.73) or abortion (OR=2.68, 95% CI=1.24–4.14) if pregnant when presenting for EC. Conclusion While one third of EC users surveyed at family planning clinics were interested in a long-term, highly effective method of contraception, only a small portion of all EC users may be interested in the copper IUD for EC. Cost is a potential barrier.

Background We hypothesized that complications for second trimester terminations are higher in a low-volume residency training program than in a high-volume private practice. Study Design Complications and cost were compared between three groups undergoing second trimester terminations: patients undergoing dilation and evacuation (D&E) at a university hospital (Hospital D&E, n=83) or medical pregnancy termination at a university hospital (Hospital Induction, n=89) and D&E at a private outpatient facility (Clinic D&E, n=253). Results Major complications occurred in 11% of the Hospital D&E, 10% of the Hospital Induction, and 1% of the Clinic D&E patients (p=.0019). Complication rates remained statistically significant when a logistic regression model was applied to the data. The mean total charge for the three respective groups was US$4625, US$5029 and US$1105 (p Conclusion Second trimester terminations of pregnancy by D&E in well-selected patients in a dedicated outpatient facility can be safer and less expensive than hospital-based D&E or induction of labor.

Objective We investigated the 1-year pregnancy rates for emergency contraception (EC) users who selected the copper T380 intrauterine device (IUD) or oral levonorgestrel (LNG) for EC. Study Design This prospective study followed women for 1 year after choosing either the copper T380 IUD or oral LNG for EC. The study was powered to detect a 6% difference in pregnancy rates within the year after presenting for EC. Results Of the 542 women who presented for EC, agreed to participate in the trial and met the inclusion criteria, 215 (40%) chose the copper IUD and 327 (60%) chose oral LNG. In the IUD group, 127 (59%) were nulligravid. IUD insertion failed in 42 women (19%). The 1-year follow-up rate was 443/542 (82%); 64% of IUD users contacted at 1 year still had their IUDs in place. The 1-year cumulative pregnancy rate in women choosing the IUD was 6.5% vs. 12.2% in those choosing oral LNG [hazard ratio (HR) 0.53, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.29–0.97, p=.041]. By type of EC method actually received, corresponding values were 5.2% for copper IUD users vs. 12.3% for oral LNG users (HR 0.42, 95% CI: 0.20–0.85, p=.017). A multivariable logistic regression model controlling for demographic variables demonstrates that women who chose the IUD for EC had fewer pregnancies in the following year than those who chose oral LNG (HR 0.50, 95% CI: 0.26–0.96, p=.037). Conclusion One year after presenting for EC, women choosing the copper IUD for EC were half as likely to have a pregnancy compared to those choosing oral LNG. Implications Compared to EC users who choose oral levonorgestrel, those who select the copper IUD have lower rates of pregnancy in the next year. Greater use of the copper IUD for EC may lower rates of unintended pregnancy in high-risk women.

This study evaluates the willingness of women presenting for emergency contraception (EC) to enroll in a study offering the copper intrauterine device (IUD) or oral levonorgestrel (LNG) and follows up the two groups for 6 months after EC administration to compare use of an effective method of contraception.This prospective observational study offered these two methods to women presenting for EC. The primary outcome was use of an effective method of contraception 6 months after presenting for EC.Thirty-four women (60%) chose oral LNG and 23 (40%) chose the copper IUD. One month after presenting for EC, 21 (96%) of 22 in the IUD group were still using the IUD and all 22 were using an effective method of contraception (efficacy ≥92%). In the LNG group, 13 (52%) of 25 were using an effective method of contraception (p.001). At 6 months, 9 (69%) of 13 IUD users and 11 (52%) of 21 oral LNG EC users were using an effective method (p=NS).Women presenting for EC were willing to enroll in a study offering the copper IUD or oral LNG.