Continuation of Copper T in Immediate Postplacental, Immediate Postabortal and Interval Period of Insertion

Overview

Journal J Obstet Gynaecol India

Specialty Gynecology & Obstetrics

Date 2022 Feb 7

PMID 35125737

Authors

Banashree Nath

Harsha S Gaikwad

Kashika Nagpal

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Aim: Copper containing IUCDs are one of most effective mode of contraception for birth spacing. We conducted this prospective observational study to suggest a possible better period of insertion of IUCDs with cost-saving benefits.

Methods: All married women in the reproductive age group desirous of Copper-T 375 IUD insertion in either immediate postplacental (PP), immediate postabortal (PA) or interval (INT) period were recruited. The women were asked to return for scheduled follow-up visits at 6 weeks, 6 months and 12 months. They were advised to visit family planning clinic any time if they experienced pelvic pain, discharge per vaginum, unusual bleeding or missed periods. At each visit, women were interviewed for any side effects they have experienced and were asked to elaborate. Pelvic pain was assessed from visual analogue scale. Continuation rate was measured at the end of one year.

Results: Women in INT group (90.14%) had the highest continuation rate followed by PP (83.18%) and PA (80%) groups. Women in PP (AOR = 3.37, 95% CI 1.17-9.72) and PA (AOR = 4.53, 95% CI 1.33-14.04) groups had higher odds of discontinuation compared to INT group after adjusting for age, parity, working and education status. There was a significant difference between the groups when cumulative expulsion was considered ( = 0.045), but none when cumulative removal ( = 0.107) was taken into account.

Conclusion: The continuation rate remained high in women who had insertion in the interval period compared to immediate postplacental and postabortal periods.

References

Garbers S, Haines-Stephan J, Lipton Y, Meserve A, Spieler L, Chiasson M . Continuation of copper-containing intrauterine devices at 6 months. Contraception. 2012; 87(1):101-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.contraception.2012.09.013. View

Mishell Jr D . Intrauterine contraception: benefits to patients. J Fam Pract. 2004; Suppl:S9-14. View

Van Der Pas M, Delbeke L, Van Dets H . Comparative performance of two copper-wired IUDs (ML Cu 250 and T Cu 200: immediate postpartum and interval insertion. Contracept Deliv Syst. 1980; 1(1):27-35. View

Flamant A, Ouldamer L, Body G, Trignol-Viguier N . Rates of continuation and satisfaction of immediate intrauterine device insertion following first- or second-trimester surgical abortion: a French prospective cohort study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2013; 169(2):268-74. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2013.04.006. View

Celen S, Moroy P, Sucak A, Aktulay A, Danisman N . Clinical outcomes of early postplacental insertion of intrauterine contraceptive devices. Contraception. 2004; 69(4):279-82. DOI: 10.1016/j.contraception.2003.12.004. View

. A randomized multicentre trial of the Multiload 375 and TCu380A IUDs in parous women: three-year results. UNDP/UNFPA/WHO/World Bank, Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction: IUD Research Group. Contraception. 1994; 49(6):543-9. View

Lara Ricalde R, Menocal Tobias G, Ramos Perez C, Velazquez Ramirez N . [Random comparative study between intrauterine device Multiload Cu375 and TCu 380a inserted in the postpartum period]. Ginecol Obstet Mex. 2006; 74(6):306-11. View

Eroglu K, Akkuzu G, Vural G, Dilbaz B, Akin A, Taskin L . Comparison of efficacy and complications of IUD insertion in immediate postplacental/early postpartum period with interval period: 1 year follow-up. Contraception. 2006; 74(5):376-81. DOI: 10.1016/j.contraception.2006.07.003. View

Ravi A, Prine L, Waltermaurer E, Miller N, Rubin S . Intrauterine devices at six months: does patient age matter? Results from an urban family medicine federally qualified health center (FQHC) network. J Am Board Fam Med. 2014; 27(6):822-30. PMC: 4280233. DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2014.06.140091. View

10.

Hou S, Zhu W, Li S, Teng Y . Acceptance and Continuation of Contraceptive Methods Immediate Postabortion. Gynecol Obstet Invest. 2016; 82(1):86-95. DOI: 10.1159/000445292. View

11.

Madden T, McNicholas C, Zhao Q, Secura G, Eisenberg D, Peipert J . Association of age and parity with intrauterine device expulsion. Obstet Gynecol. 2014; 124(4):718-726. PMC: 4172535. DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000000475. View

12.

Jatlaoui T, Whiteman M, Jeng G, Tepper N, Berry-Bibee E, Jamieson D . Intrauterine Device Expulsion After Postpartum Placement: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol. 2018; 132(4):895-905. PMC: 6549490. DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000002822. View

13.

Xu J, Reusche C, Burdan A . Immediate postplacental insertion of the intrauterine device: a review of Chinese and the world's experiences. Adv Contracept. 1994; 10(1):71-82. DOI: 10.1007/BF01986532. View

14.

Sastrawinata S, Farr G, Prihadi S, Hutapea H, Anwar M, Wahyudi I . A comparative clinical trial of the TCu 380A, Lippes Loop D and Multiload Cu 375 IUDs in Indonesia. Contraception. 1991; 44(2):141-54. DOI: 10.1016/0010-7824(91)90114-u. View

15.

. Interval iud insertion in parous women: a randomized multicentre comparative trial of the Lippes Loop D, TCu220c and the Copper 7. Contraception. 1982; 26(1):1-22. DOI: 10.1016/0010-7824(82)90167-6. View

16.

Parikh V, Gandhi A . Safety of copper T as contraceptive after caesarean section. J Indian Med Assoc. 1989; 87(5):113-5. View

17.

Sucak A, Ozcan S, Celen S, Caglar T, Goksu G, Danisman N . Immediate postplacental insertion of a copper intrauterine device: a pilot study to evaluate expulsion rate by mode of delivery. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2015; 15:202. PMC: 4557593. DOI: 10.1186/s12884-015-0637-6. View

18.

Dias T, Abeykoon S, Kumarasiri S, Gunawardena C, Padeniya T, DAntonio F . Use of ultrasound in predicting success of intrauterine contraceptive device insertion immediately after delivery. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2014; 46(1):104-8. DOI: 10.1002/uog.14733. View

19.

Iklaki C, Agbakwuru A, Udo A, Abeshi S . Five-year review of copper T intrauterine device use at the University of Calabar Teaching Hospital, Calabar. Open Access J Contracept. 2018; 6:143-147. PMC: 5683138. DOI: 10.2147/OAJC.S82176. View

20.

Bonilla Rosales F, Aguilar Zamudio M, Cazares Montero M, Hernandez Ortiz M, Luna Ruiz M . [Factors for expulsion of intrauterine device Tcu380A applied immediately postpartum and after a delayed period]. Rev Med Inst Mex Seguro Soc. 2005; 43(1):5-10. View