22
Views
0
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
(RG) Obstetrics and Gynaecology

Intrauterine devices – perceptions overestimate the hazards

&
Pages 231-233 | Published online: 06 Jul 2009

REFERENCES

  • O’Brien P, Marfleet C. Frameless vs the classical IUD for contraception (protocol). The Cochrane Library 2000; Review 2
  • IUDs an Update – Population Reports 1995. Series B, number 6. John Hopkins School of Public Health, USA
  • Office for National Statistics. General Household Survey 1995. Series GHS No 26. London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, 1997
  • Forrest ID, Fordyce RR. Women’s contraceptive attitudes and use in 1992. Fam Plann Perspect 1993;25:175–9
  • Rosenberg MJ, Rosenthal SM. Reproductive mortality in the United States; recent trends and methodological considerations. Am J Public Health 1987;77:833–6
  • Bernard R. Factors governing IUD performance. Am J Public Health 1971; 61:559
  • Robertson EM, ed. Proceed with caution during difficult IUD insertions. Contracept Technol Update 1986; 7:61–4
  • Stumpf PG, Lenker RM. Insertion technique, not design affects expulsion rates of post partum IUD. Contraception 1984;30:327–30
  • Mischel D. The clinic factor in evaluating IUDs. In Segal S, Hefnawi F, eds. Analysis of Intrauterine Contra- ception. Proceedings of the Third International Confer- ence on Intrauterine Contraception, Oxford, 1975: 490
  • Westrom L. Incidence, prevalence and trends of acute pelvic inflammatory disease and its consequences in individualised countries. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1980;138:880–92
  • WHO Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction. Task Force on intrauterine devices for fertility regulation. A multinational case control study of ectopic pregnancy. Clin Reprod Fertil 1985;3:131–43
  • Grimes DA. Intrauterine devices and upper genital tract infections. Lancet 2000;356:1013–19
  • Farley TM, Rosenberg MJ, Rowe PJ, et al. Intrauterine devices and pelvic inflammatory disease: an inter- national perspective. Lancet 1992;339:785–8
  • Grimes DA, Schultz KF. Antibiotic prophylaxis for insertion of intrauterine devices. The Cochrane Library 1999;Issue 4: 1
  • Gupta S, Kirkman RJE. Intrauterine devices: an update on clinical performance. Obstetrician Gynaecologist 2002; 4:in press
  • Doll H, Vessey M, Painter R. Return of fertility in nulliparous women after discontinuation of the intra- uterine device: comparison with women discontinuing other methods of contraception. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 2001;108:304–14
  • Grimes D. Intrauterine devices and infertility: sifting through the evidence. Lancet 2001;358:6–7
  • Sivin I. Dose and age dependent ectopic pregnancy risks with intrauterine contraception. Obstet Gynecol 1991; 78:291–8
  • Skejeldestad FE. How effectively do copper IUDs prevent ectopic pregnancy? Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1997;76:684–90
  • Xiong X, Buckens P, Wallast E. A meta analysis of case control studies of use of intrauterine devices and risk of ectopic pregnancy. Contraception 1995;52:23–34
  • United Nations Development Program/United Nations Population Fund/WHO/World Bank, Special Program of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction. Long term revers- ible contraception – twelve years experience with Cu T 380A and T Cu 220 C. Contraception 1997;56:341–52
  • French RS, Cowan FM, Mansour DF, et al. Implantable contraceptives vs other forms of reversible contra- ceptives: 2 systematic reviews to assess relative effective- ness, acceptability, tolerability and cost effectiveness. Health Technol Assess 2000; 4:191
  • Toivonens J, Luikannen TR, Allouen H. Protective effect of intrauterine release of levonorgestrel on pelvic infection. Three years comparative experience of levonorgestrel and copper releasing intrauterine devices. Obstet Gynecol 1991;7:261–4
  • Anderson JK, Rybo G. Levonorgestrel releasing intra- uterine device in the treatment of menorrhagia. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1990;97:690–4
  • Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. The Initial Management of Menorrhagia – Evidence Based Clinical Guidelines. London: RCOG Press, 1998
  • Andersson K, Ryde-Blomquist E, Lindell K, et al. Perforations with intrauterine devices. Report from a Swedish survey. Contraception 1998;57:251–5
  • Schvo S, Hamminki E, Kosunen E. Contraceptive health risks – women’s perceptions. J Psychosom Obstet Gynecol 1998;19:117–25

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.