Steiner Marcelo Luis, Mendes Julia Lorenzini, Strufaldi Rodolfo, Carneiro Monica, Giovanelli Silvana Aparecida, da Silva Mariliza Henrique
Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Faculdade de Medicina do ABC, Santo André, Brazil.
Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Hospital Municipal Universitário de São Bernardo, São Bernardo do Campo, Brazil.
Front Glob Womens Health. 2023 Aug 10;4:1052224. doi: 10.3389/fgwh.2023.1052224. eCollection 2023.
To determine the epidemiological profile of women who inserted copper intrauterine device (Cu-IUD), subdermal etonogestrel implant (ENG), tubal ligation (TL), depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA) or did not choose a contraceptive method (NCM) in the immediate postpartum period and compare the contraceptive effectiveness of Cu-IUD and DPMA with non-MAC.
We analyzed the epidemiological profile of women who inserted copper intrauterine device (Cu-IUD), subdermal etonogestrel implant (ENG), tubal ligation (TL), depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA) or did not choose a contraceptive method (NCM) in the immediate postpartum. The data was collected by electronic medical records of postpartum women assisted at the University Hospital of São Bernardo do Campo (HMU-SBC) from January 2016 to December 2020. Also, we compared the contraceptive effectiveness of Cu-IUD and DPMA with non-MAC by identifying women who returned for second delivery during the study period and analyzing the contraceptive method chosen in the first hospitalization. Then the pregnancies interval and the sociodemographic characteristics were analyzed according to contraceptive method type.
Data from 20,896 women were collected, of which 8,183 (39%) opted for Cu-IUD, 559 (2.5%) DPMA, and 10,989 (52.5%) chose not to use contraception at the time of hospital discharge. When comparing these groups, women in the DPMA were younger (26.5 ± 7.3, < 0.05), and NCM showed women with a lower number of pregnancies (2.2 ± 1.3, < 0.05). Subjects in the TL group (4.6%) had the higher number of pregnancies (3.8 ± 1.2, < 0.05), and ENG group, the highest number of miscarriages (1.6 ± 1.3, < 0.05). Of those women who returned pregnant, 5.5% belonged to the DPMA group, 6% to the NCM group, and 2.3% to the Cu-IUD.
Women who opted for Cu-IUD insertion were younger, had more pregnancies and vaginal delivery when compared to those who did not choose a method. Of those women who returned, the minority opted for Cu-IUD compared to those that opted for DPMA or no method.
确定产后立即置入铜宫内节育器（Cu-IUD）、皮下埋植依托孕烯（ENG）、输卵管结扎（TL）、醋酸甲羟孕酮长效注射剂（DMPA）或未选择避孕方法（NCM）的女性的流行病学特征，并比较Cu-IUD和DMPA与非医学辅助生育（non-MAC）的避孕效果。
我们分析了产后立即置入铜宫内节育器（Cu-IUD）、皮下埋植依托孕烯（ENG）、输卵管结扎（TL）、醋酸甲羟孕酮长效注射剂（DMPA）或未选择避孕方法（NCM）的女性的流行病学特征。数据通过圣保罗坎普斯大学医院（HMU-SBC）2016年1月至2020年12月辅助分娩的产后女性的电子病历收集。此外，我们通过识别研究期间再次分娩的女性并分析首次住院时选择的避孕方法，比较了Cu-IUD和DMPA与非医学辅助生育（non-MAC）的避孕效果。然后根据避孕方法类型分析妊娠间隔和社会人口学特征。
收集了20896名女性的数据，其中8183名（39%）选择Cu-IUD，559名（2.5%）选择DMPA，10989名（52.5%）在出院时选择不使用避孕措施。比较这些组时，DMPA组的女性更年轻（26.5±7.3，P<0.05），NCM组的女性妊娠次数较少（2.2±1.3，P<0.05）。TL组的受试者（4.6%）妊娠次数最多（3.8±1.2，P<0.05），ENG组的流产次数最多（1.6±1.3，P<0.05）。在那些再次怀孕的女性中，5.5%属于DMPA组，6%属于NCM组，2.3%属于Cu-IUD组。
与未选择避孕方法的女性相比，选择置入Cu-IUD的女性更年轻，妊娠次数更多且顺产次数更多。在那些再次分娩的女性中，与选择DMPA或未选择避孕方法的女性相比，选择Cu-IUD的女性占少数。
