Use of IUDs for emergency contraception: current perspectives

References

• Subgh S, Sedgh G, Hussain R et al. Unintended pregnancy: worldwide levels, trends and outcomes. Stud Fam Plann. 2010;41(4):241–50.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mosher WD, Jones J, Abma JC et al. Intended and unintended births in the USA 1982–2010. National Health Statistics report. 2012:55.
   Google Scholar
• Wellings K, Jones KG, Mercer CH, et al. The prevalence of unplanned pregnancy and associated risk factors in Britain: findings from the third National Survey of Sexual attitudes and Lifestyles (Natsal-3). Lancet. 2013;382:1807–1816.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wellings K, Field J, Johnson AM et al. Sexual Behaviour in Britain: The National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles. London: Penguin Books Ltd. 1994.
   Google Scholar
• Wellings K, Nanchalal K, Macdowall W et al. 2001. Lancet. 358 (9296):1843–1850.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilcox AJ, Dunson DB, Weinberg CR, Trussell J, Baird DD. Likelihood of conception with a single act of intercourse: providing benchmark rates for assessment of post-coital contraceptives. Contraception. 2001;63:211–215.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Department of Health. Judicial Review of Emergency Contraception. R v Secretary of State for Health (Defendant) & (1) Schering Health Care Ltd (2) Family Planning Association (Interested Parties), Ex Parte John Smeaton (on behalf of The Society for the Protection of Unborn Children) (Claimant). 2002 EWCH 610 (Admin), 2002, Crim LR 665. 2003. Available from: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publichealth/Healthimprovement/Sexualhealth/ Sexualhealthgeneralinformation/DH_4063853. Accessed May 30, 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Glasier AF, Cameron ST, Fine PM, et al. Ulipristal acetate versus levonorgestrel for emergency contraception: a randomized non-inferiority trial and meta-analysis. Lancet. 2010;375:555–562.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stratton P, Levens ED, Hartog B, et al. Endometrial effects of a single early luteal dose of the selective progesterone receptor modulator CDB-2914. Fert Steril. 2010;93:2035–2041.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stratton P, Hartog B, Hajizadeh N, et al. A single mid-follicular dose of CDB-2914, a new antiprogestin, inhibits folliculogenesis and endometrial differentiation in normally cycling women. Hum Reprod. 2000;15(5):1092–1099.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brache V, Cochon L, Jesam C, et al. Immediate pre-ovulatory administration of 30 mg ulipristal acetate significantly delays follicular rupture. Hum Reprod. 2010;25:2256–2263.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Noé G, Croxatto HB, Salvatierra AM, et al. Contraceptive efficacy of emergency contraception with levonorgestrel given before or after ovulation. Contraception. 2010;81:414–420.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Piaggo G, Kapp N, von Hertzen H. Effect on pregnancy rates of the delay in administration of levonorgestrel for emergency contraception: a combined analysis of four WHO trials. Contraception. 2011;84:35–39.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Creinin MD, Schlaff WD, Archer DF, et al. Progesterone receptor modulator for emergency contraception: a randomized controlled trial. Ostet Gynecol. 2006;108:1089–1097.
   Google Scholar
• Cleland K, Zhu H, Goldstuck N, Cheng L, Trussell J. The efficacy of intrauterine devices for emergency contraception: a systematic review of 35 years of experience. Hum Reprod. 2012;27(7):1994–2000.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stanford JB, Mikolajczyk RT. Mechanisms of action of intrauterine devices: update and estimation of postfertilization effects. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002;187:1699–1708.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilcox AJ, Baird DD, Weinberg CR. Time of implantation of the conceptus and loss of pregnancy. N Engl J Med. 1999;340:1796–1799.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• [No authors listed]. Mechanism of action, safety and efficacy of intrauterine devices. Report of a WHO Scientific Group. World Health Organ Tech Rep Ser. 1987;753:1–91.
   Google Scholar
• WHO (World Health Organisation). Medical eligibility criteria for contraceptive use. 2009 4th edition. P79. Geneva.
   Google Scholar
• Faculty of Sexual and Reproductive Healthcare Clinical Guidance. Emergency Contraception, Clinical Effectiveness Unit. August 2011 (updated January 2012).
   Google Scholar
• CDC: US Selected Practice recommendations for Contraceptive Use, 2013: Adapted from the World health Organisation Selected Practice Recommendations for Contraceptive Use, 2nd edition.
   Google Scholar
• Turok DK, Godfrey EM, Wojdyla D, Dermish A, Torres L, Wu SC. Copper T380 intrauterine device for emergency contraception: highly effective at any time in the menstrual cycle. Hum Reprod. 2013;28(10):2672–2676.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trussell J, Ellertson C, von Hertzen H, et al. Estimating the effectiveness of emergency contraceptive pills. Contraception. 2003;67(4):259–265.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilcox AJ, Weinberg CR, Baird DD. Post-ovulatory ageing of the human oocyte and embryo failure. Hum Reprod. 1998;13:394–397.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stirling A, Glasier A. Estimating the efficacy of emergency contraception – how reliable are the data? Contraception. 2002;66:19–22.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Novikova N, Weisberg E, Stanczyk FZ, Croxatto HB, Fraser IS. Effectiveness of levonorgestrel emergency contraception given before and after ovulation – a pilot study. Contraception. 2007;75:112–118.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brache V, Cochon L, Deniaud M, Croxatto HB. Ulipristal acetate prevents ovulation more effectively than levonorgestrel: analysis of pooled data from three randomized trials of emergency contraception regimens. Contraception. 2013;88:611–618.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Croxatto HB, Brache B, Cochon L, et al. The effects of immediate pre-ovulatory administration of 30 mg ulipristal acetate on follicular rupture. 8th Congress of the European Society of Gynecology; September 10–13, 2009; Rome.
   Google Scholar
• Glasier A, Cameron ST, Blithe D, et al. Can we identify women at risk of pregnancy despite using emergency contraception? Data from randomized trials of ulipristal acetate and levonorgestrel. Contraception. 2011;84:363–367.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trussell J, Lalla AM, Doan QV, Reyes E, Pinto L, Gricar J. Cost effectiveness of contraceptives in the United States. Contraception. 2009;79:5–14.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• von Hertzen H, Piaggio G, Ding J, et al; WHO Research Group on Post-ovulatory Methods of Fertility Regulation. Low dose mifepristone and two regimens of levonorgestrel for emergency contraception: a WHO multicentre randomised trial. Lancet. 2002;360:1803–1810.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheng L, Gülmezoglu AM, Piaggio G, Ezcurra E, Van Look PF. Interventions for emergency contraception. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008(2):CD001324.
   Google Scholar
• Faculty of Sexual and Reproductive Health Care Clinical Effectiveness Unit. Quick Starting Contraception. 2010. Available from: http://www.fsrh.org/pdfs/CEUguidanceEmergencyContraception11.pdf. Accessed May 30, 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Cameron ST, Glasier A, Johnstone A, Rae L. Ongoing contraception after use of emergency contraception from a specialist contraceptive service. Contraception. 2011;84:368–371.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mohllajee AP, Curtis KM, Peterson HB. Does insertion and use of an intrauterine device increase the risk of pelvic inflammatory disease among women with sexually transmitted infection? A systematic review. Contraception. 2006;73(2);145–153.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farley TM, Rosenberg MJ, Rowe PJ, Chen JH, Meirik O. Intrauterine devices and pelvic inflammatory disease: an international perspective. Lancet. 1992;339(8796):785–788.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grimes DA. Intrauterine device and upper-genital-tract infection. Lancet. 2000;356(9234):1013–1019.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bayer LL, Jensen JT, Li H, Nichols MD, Bednarek PH. Adolescent experience with intrauterine device insertion and use: a retrospective cohort study. Contraception. 2012;86:443–451.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lader D. Opinions survey report no 41. Contraception and Sexual Health, 2008–9. Office for National Statistics; 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Michie L, Cameron ST, Glasier A, Wellings K, Loudon J. Myths and misconceptions about intrauterine contraception among women seeking termination of pregnancy. J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care. 2014;40:36–40.
   Google Scholar
• Baird AS. Use of ulipristal acetate, levonorgestrel and the copper-intrauterine device for emergency contraception following the introduction of new FSRH guidelines. J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care. 2013;39:264–269.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ziebland S, et al. “It’s a mega dose of hormones, isn’t it?”. Why women may be reluctant to use emergency contraception. Br J Fam Plann. 1996;22:84–86.
   Google Scholar
• McKay R, Gilbert L. An emergency contraception algorithm based on risk assessment: changes in clinician’s practice and patient’s choices. J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care. 2013;39(3)201–206.
   Google Scholar
• Asker C, Stokes-Lampard H, Beavan J, Wilson S. What is it about intrauterine devices that women find unacceptable? Factors that make women non-users: a qualitative study. J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care. 2006;32(2):89–94.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Glasier A. Attitudes of women in Scotland to contraception: a qualitative study to explore the acceptability of long-acting methods. J Fam Plann Reprod Healthcare. 2008;34(4):213–217.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• d’Arcangues C. Worldwide use of intrauterine devices for contraception. Contraception. 2007;75(Suppl 6):S2–S7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Espey E, Singh RH, Leeman L, Ogburn T, Fowler K, Greene H. Misoprostol for intrauterine device insertion in nulliparous women: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;210(3):208. e1–e5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bahamondes L, Mansour D, Fiala C, Kaunitz AM, Gemzell-Danielsson K. Practical advice for avoidance of pain associated with insertion of intrauterine contraceptives. J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care. 2014;40(1):54–60.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Moreau C, Bouyer J, Goulard H, Bajos N. The remaining barriers to the use of emergency contraception: perception of pregnancy risk by women undergoing induced abortions. Contraception. 2005;71:202–207.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wright RL, Frost CJ, Turok DK. A qualitative exploration of emergency contraception users’ willingness to select the copper IUD. Contraception. 2012;85:32–35.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwarz EB, Kavanaugh M, Douglas E, Dubowitz T, Creinin MD. Interest in intrauterine contraception among seekers of emergency contraception and pregnancy testing. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;113:833–839.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bharadwaj P, Saxton JC, Mann SN, Jungmann EM, Stephenson JM. What influences young women to choose between the emergency contraceptive pill and an intrauterine device? A qualitative study. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2011;16:201–209.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turok DK, Gurtcheff SE, Handley E, et al. A survey of women obtaining emergency contraception: are they interested in using the copper IUD? Contraception. 2011;83:441–446.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• International Consortium for Emergency Contraception [homepage on the Internet]. New York, NY: International Consortium for Emergency Contraception. Available from: http://www.cecinfo.org. Accessed April 30, 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Rodriguez MI, Curtis KM, Gaffield ML, Jackson E, Kapp N. Advance supply of emergency contraception: a systematic review. Contraception. 2013;87:590–601.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Polis CB, Schaffer K, Blanchard K, Glasier A, Harper CC, Grimes DA. Advance provision of emergency contraception for pregnancy prevention (full review). Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007;(2):CD005497.
   Google Scholar
• Raymond EG, Trussell J, Polis CB. Population effect of increased access to emergency contraceptive pills: a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol. 2007;109(1):181–188.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glasier A, Manners R, Loudon JC, Muir A. Community pharmacists providing emergency contraception give little advice about future contraceptive use: a mystery shopper study. Contraception. 2010;82:538–542.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clement KM, Mansour D. Improving uptake of the copper intrauterine device for emergency contraception by educating pharmacists in the community. J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care. 2014;40:41–45.
   Google Scholar
• Bannister L, Macve J, Pinkey B, Webberley H. Is the faculty of family planning and reproductive health care guidance on emergency contraception being followed in general practice? An audit in the West Midlands, UK. J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care. 2007:33(3):195–198.
   Google Scholar
• Harper CC, Speidel JJ, Drey EA, Trussell J, Blum M, Darney PD. Copper intrauterine device for emergency contraception: clinical practice among contraceptive providers. Obstet Gynecol. 2012;119(2 Pt 1):220–226.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McKay RJ, Gilbert L. Comment on ‘an emergency contraception algorithm based on risk assessment: changes in clinicians’ practice and patients’ choices’: authors’ response. Fam Plann Reprod Health Care. 2013;39:231.
   Google Scholar
• Singh S, Sedgh G, Hussain R. Unintended pregnancy: worldwide levels, trends, and outcomes. Stud Fam Plann. 2010;41(4):241–250.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grimes DA, Benson J, Singh S, et al. Unsafe abortion: the preventable pandemic. Lancet. 2006;368(9550):1908–1919.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mohllajee AP, Curtis KM, Morrow B, Marchbanks PA. Pregnancy intention and its relationship to birth and maternal outcomes. Obstet Gynecol. 2007;109:678–686.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gipson JD, Koenig MA, Hindin MJ. The effects of unintended pregnancy on infant, child and parental health: a review of the literature. Stud Fam Plann. 2008;39(1):18–38.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shah PS, Balkhair T, Ohlsson A, Beyene J, Scott F, Frick C. Intention to become pregnant and low birth weight and preterm birth: a systematic review. Matern Child Health J. 2011;15(2):205–216.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baram I, Weinstein A, Trussell J. The IUB, a newly invented IUD: a brief report. Contraception. 2014;89(2):139–141.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar