American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology
Volume 197, Issue 2 , Pages 193.e1-193.e7, August 2007

Intrauterine device use in a high-risk population: experience from an urban university clinic

Presented at the 69th Annual Meeting of the South Atlantic Association of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, Hot Springs, VA, Jan. 27-30, 2007; the John McCain Fellowship Award for the prize resident article.

  • Samuel J. Campbell, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA
  • ,
  • Karen L. Cropsey, PsyD

      Affiliations

    • Douglas Wilder School of Government and Public Affairs, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA.
  • ,
  • Catherine A. Matthews, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA

Received 16 October 2006; received in revised form 19 March 2007; accepted 19 April 2007.

Objective

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the acceptability, efficacy, and complication rates of the ParaGard intrauterine device (IUD; Duramed Pharmaceuticals Inc, Cincinnati, OH) and the Mirena intrauterine system (IUS; Berlax Laboratories, Wayne, NJ) in a cohort of women who attended an urban university-based obstetrics and gynecology resident clinic.

Study Design

A retrospective chart review was conducted for 194 women who had an IUD/IUS inserted between January 2000-December 2005.

Results

One-third of the women who received an IUD had a history of sexually transmitted disease before the insertion. No differences were found between women with an IUD or an IUS regarding demographics and obstetric and gynecologic history before IUD insertion. The IUD was associated with significantly higher rates of herpes simplex and Neisseria gonorrhea infections, complaints of expulsion, and unintended pregnancy after the insertion. No increased risk of pelvic inflammatory disease was associated with IUD use.

Conclusion

IUD/IUS use appears to be safe, acceptable, and feasible in high-risk patients. The IUS had lower rates of complications and greater acceptability than the IUD.

Key words: intrauterine device, sexually transmitted disease, urban

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 30.00 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

 Cite this article as: Campbell SJ, Cropsey KL, Matthews CA. Intrauterine device use in a high-risk population: experience from an urban university clinic. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2007;197:193.e1-193.e7.Reprints not available from the authors.

PII: S0002-9378(07)00549-2

doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2007.04.028

American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology
Volume 197, Issue 2 , Pages 193.e1-193.e7, August 2007