Intrauterine Devices: Separating Fact From Fallacy

, Magee-Womens Hospital, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine

Disclosures
In This Article

Tables

Table I - 10-Year Experience With ParaGard

  Year
  1 2 3 4 5
Pregnancy rate 0.7% 0.3% 0.6% 0.2% 0.3%
Continuation rate 76.8% 78.3% 81.2% 86.2% 89.0%
Number of women using T 380A at the start of each year 4932 3149 2018 1121 872
  Year
  6 7 8 9 10
Pregnancy rate 0.2% 0% 0.4% 0% 0%
Continuation rate 91.9% 87.9% 88.1% 92.0% 91.8%
Number of women using T 380A at the start of each year 621 563 483 423 325
           

Adapted from Speroff L, Darney P: A Clinical Guide for Contraception, ed 2 (1996; p 203), Copyright © 1996, Williams & Wilkins.[42]

Table II - Continuation Rates and Reasons for Discontinuation During First Year of IUD Use*

  Progestasert ParaGard
  Parous Women Nulliparous Women Parous Women
Pregnancy 1.8% 2.5% 0.5%
Expulsion 2.7% 7.6% 2.3%
Bleeding/pain + + 3.4%
Planning pregnancy + + 0.6%
Other 14.3% 16.5% 1.1%
Continuation 81.2% 73.4% 92.1%
       

* From manufacturer's insert for corresponding IUD.

+ Not specified, included in Other.

Table III - Conception Rates After Discontinuing Contraception

  Pill IUD Diaphragm All Others
Months to Conception (n=1086) (n=451) (n=903) (n=774)
1-3 38.9% 54.1% 65.4% 58.3%
4-6 18.3% 18.6% 15.3% 16.9%
7-9 11.2% 10.0% 7.0% 8.9%
10-12 6.8% 4.9% 3.8% 4.0%
>/=13 24.8% 12.4% 8.5% 11.9%
         

From Lippes et al.[35]

Comments

3090D553-9492-4563-8681-AD288FA52ACE
Comments on Medscape are moderated and should be professional in tone and on topic. You must declare any conflicts of interest related to your comments and responses. Please see our Commenting Guide for further information. We reserve the right to remove posts at our sole discretion.
Post as:

processing....