![The World Congress on Controversies in Obstetrics, Gynecology and Infertility (COGI). Click here to learn more.]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/112382/JournalAd-COGI2024-Leaderboard.jpg"})
![Sample our Medicine, Dentistry, Nursing & Allied Health journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5944/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Medicine-Dentistry-Nursing-Allied-Health.jpg"})
Summary
The reported uptake of the intrauterine device (IUD) as emergency contraception is very low despite its superior efficacy when compared with levonorgestrel emergency contraception. A prospective study was conducted to investigate the methods of emergency contraception offered to and accepted by women attending South Staffordshire Sexual Health Clinics. A total of 240 women attended the clinic for emergency contraception during the 2-month study period. The IUD as a method of emergency contraception was not offered to the majority of women presenting within 72 h of an episode of unprotected intercourse. Nulliparous women presenting before 72 h were significantly less likely to be offered an IUD compared with parous women, p < 0.01. This study shows that the IUD is not offered to the majority of patients, in particular nulliparous women, attending for emergency contraception. Also, the low rate of the uptake of the emergency IUD is related, at least in part, to the counselling patients receive from clinicians.