The Effectiveness of Postpartum IUD Compared to Interval IUD in ‘Aisyiyah Hospital Klaten

Ivanna Beru Brahmana; Ana Majdawati; Inayati Inayati

doi:10.3889/oamjms.2021.7848

Authors

Ivanna Beru Brahmana Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Medical Study Program, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta, Indonesia https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4604-5557
Ana Majdawati Departement of Radiology, Medical Study Program, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta, Indonesia
Inayati Inayati Departement of Medical Microbiology, Medical Study Program, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta, Indonesia https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4536-7741

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3889/oamjms.2021.7848

Keywords:

Fungus, Interval intra-uterine device, Intra-uterine device thread, Postpartum intra-uterine device, Vaginal discharge

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Postpartum IUD (PPIUD) insertion is performed 10 min after the placenta is born until 48 h postpartum, interval method is installed after 4 weeks postpartum. The use of this contraception will provide a distance between pregnancies not to be too close.

AIM: To assess the effectiveness of PPIUD and the interval on complaints and complications in acceptors.

METHODOLOGY: This study used a cross-sectional design. The subjects were women who gave birth vaginally and cesarean section at the ‘Aisyiyah Hospital Klaten with PPIUD and interval acceptors installed. Complaint data obtained through history taking, complications obtained from ultrasound, inspeculo examination, and vaginal swab. Data were analyzed by univariate, bivariate, and multivariate analysis.

RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-nine subjects consisted of 82 (63.6%) PPIUD and 47 (36.4%) interval. On ultrasound examination, 126 (97.7%) subjects had no abnormalities, two (1.6%) had abnormalities, and one (0.8%) found ovarian cysts. On inspeculo examination, 89 (69.0%) subjects found no erotion, and 40 (31.0%) did not find abnormalities. Vaginal swab examination showed that 119 (92.2%) subjects had pathogenic bacteria, ten (7.8%) were normal. The fungus was positive in 75 (58.1%) subjects, and no fungus was in 54 (41.9%), while in NGO, positive was 18 (14.0%) subjects, and negative was 111 (86.0%). There was a significant relationship that the type of IUD insertion had husband’s complaints (p = 0.021), the erosion incidence (p = 0.011), the presence/absence of threads (p = 0.01), and the presence of fungus (0.00). PPIUD is more effective than interval IUD.

CONCLUSION: PPIUD is more effective in terms of the lack of complaints from the husband, the incidence of erosion, the presence or absence of threads, and found of fungus on the vaginal swab than interval IUD.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Plum Analytics Artifact Widget Block

References

Tocce KM, Sheeder JL, Teal SB. Rapid repeat pregnancy in adolescents: Do immediate postpartum contraceptive implants make a difference? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;206(6):481. e1-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2012.04.015 PMid:22631865 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2012.04.015

Mwalwanda CS, Black KI. Immediate post-partum initiation of intrauterine contraception and implants: A review of the safety and guidelines for use. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2013;53(4):331-7. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajo.12095. PMid:23635040 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ajo.12095

Chhari A, Zutshi V, Sharma R, Batra S. Comparison of post placental IUD with interval IUD. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2015;4(4):1090-3. https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20150433 DOI: https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20150433

Teal SB. Postpartum contraception: Optimizing interpregnancy intervals. Contraception. 2014;89(6):487-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2014.04.013 PMid:24815100 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2014.04.013

Wildemeersch D, Goldstuck ND, Hasskamp T. Current status of frameless anchored iud for immediate intracesarean insertion. Dev Period Med. 2016;20(1):7-15. PMid:27416620

Nerlander LM, Callaghan WM, Smith RA, Barfield WD. Short interpregnancy interval associated with preterm birth in US adolescents. Matern Child Health J. 2015;19(4):850-8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10995-014-1583-z PMid:25062997 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10995-014-1583-z

ASEANstat, Maternal Mortality Rate; 2021. Available from: https://www.aseanstats.org/publication/asean-maternalmortality-rate-infographic [Last accessed on 2021 Dec 24].

Budiarti I, Nuryani DD, Hidayat R. The Determinant of Using Long Term Birth Contraceptive Method (LTBCM) on KB Acceptor. J Kesehat. 2017;8(2):220. https://doi.org/10.26630/jk.v8i2.490 DOI: https://doi.org/10.26630/jk.v8i2.490

Misnaniarti M, Ayuningtyas D. Unmet need for family planning in Indonesia and the policy strategy of intervention in several countries. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2016;5(6):1680-5. https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20161652 DOI: https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20161652

Winarni E, Dawam M. Family planning information, education and communication with contraceptive use. Kesmas. 2016;11(2):94-102. https://doi.org/10.21109/kesmas.v11i2.801 DOI: https://doi.org/10.21109/kesmas.v11i2.801

Westoff CF. Unmet Need for Modern Contraceptive Methods. DHS Anal Stud. No. 28; 2012. Available from: http://www.dhsprogram.com/pubs/pdf/as28/as28.pdf. [Last accessed on 2021 Dec 25].

Katheit G, Agarwal J. Evaluation of post-placental intrauterine device (PPIUCD) in terms of awareness, acceptance, and expulsion in a tertiary care centre. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2013;2(4):539. https://doi.org/10.5455/2320-1770.ijrcog20131210 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5455/2320-1770.ijrcog20131210

Agarwal K, Dewan R, Mittal P, Aggarwal A. Visibility of strings after postplacental intracesarean insertion of CuT380A and Cu375 intrauterine contraceptive device: A randomized comparative study. J Obstet Gynaecol India. 2017;67(5):324-9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13224-017-0965-8 PMid:28867882 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13224-017-0965-8

Makins A, Taghinejadi N, Sethi M, Machiyama K, Thapa K, Perera G, et al. Factors influencing the likelihood of acceptance of postpartum intrauterine devices across four countries: India, Nepal, Sri Lanka, and Tanzania. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2018;143 Suppl 1:13-9. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.12599 PMid:30225876 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.12599

ACOG. Immediate Postpartum Long-Acting Reversible Contraception. Vol. 128. United States: ACOG; 2016. p. e32-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000001587

Raghuwanshi R, Chavan S, Hegde LC. To assess the safety and expulsion rate of cut 380a in immediate postpartum period. Int J Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2019;3(6):286-9. https://doi.org/10.33545/gynae.2019.v3.i6e.427 DOI: https://doi.org/10.33545/gynae.2019.v3.i6e.427

Singh S, Das V, Agarwal A, Dewan R, Mittal P, Bhamrah R, et al. A dedicated postpartum intrauterine device inserter: Pilot experience and proof of concept. Glob Health Sci Pract. 2016;4(1):132-40. https://doi.org/10.9745/GHSP-D-15-00355

Heller R, Johnstone A, Cameron ST. Routine provision of intrauterine contraception at elective cesarean section in a national public health service: A service evaluation. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2017;96(9):1144-51. https://doi.org/10.1111/aogs.13178 PMid:28590560

Cooper M, McGeechan K, Glasier A, Coutts S, McGuire F, Harden J, et al. Provision of immediate postpartum intrauterine contraception after vaginal birth within a public maternity setting: Health services research evaluation. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2020;99(5):598-607. https://doi.org/10.1111/aogs.13787 PMid:31837002

Braaten KP, Benson CB, Maurer R, Goldberg AB. Malpositioned intrauterine contraceptive devices: Risk factors, outcomes, and future pregnancies. Obstet Gynecol. 2011;118(5):1014-20. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e3182316308 PMid:22015868

Singh U, Sonkar S, Yadav P, Dayal M, Gupta V, Saxena S. Comparative evaluation of postpartum IUCD versus interval IUCD at a tertiary care centre in Allahabad, India. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2017;6(4):1534. https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20171423

Makins A, Taghinejadi N, Sethi M, Machiyama K, Munganyizi P, Odongo E, et al. FIGO postpartum intrauterine device initiative: Complication rates across six countries. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2018;143 Suppl 1:20-7. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.12600 PMid:30225873

Muganyizi PS, Kimario G, Ponsian P, Howard K, Sethi M. Clinical outcomes of postpartum intrauterine devices inserted by midwives in Tanzania. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2018;143(1):38-42. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.12603 PMid:30225875

Makins A. Clinical outcomes of postpartum intrauterine devices inserted by midwives in Tanzania. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2018;143(1):38-42. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.12603 PMid:30225875

Çelen Ş, Sucak A, Yıldız Y, Danışman N. Immediate postplacental insertion of an intrauterine contraceptive device during cesarean section. Contraception. 2011;84(3):240-3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2011.01.006 PMid:21843687 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2011.01.006

Lucksom PG, Kanungo BK, Sebastian N, Mehrotra R, Pradhan D, Upadhya R. Comparative study of interval versus postpartum Cu-T insertion in a central referral hospital of North East India. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2015;4(1):1. https://doi.org/10.5455/2320-1770.ijrcog20150209 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5455/2320-1770.ijrcog20150209

Goldthwaite LM, Sheeder J, Hyer J, Tocce K, Teal SB. Postplacental intrauterine device expulsion by 12 weeks: A prospective cohort study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;217(6):674. e1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2017.08.001 PMid:28826801 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2017.08.001

Jatlaoui TC, Whiteman MK, Jeng G, Tepper NK, Berry-Bibee E, Jamieson DJ, et al. Intrauterine device expulsion after postpartum placement: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol. 2018;132(4):895-905. https://doi.org/10.1097/aog.0000000000002822 PMid:30204688 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000002822

Hay P. Vaginal discharge. Medicine. 2018;46(6):319-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mpmed.2018.03.006 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mpmed.2018.03.006

Ilankoon IM, Gunawardana CS, Fernandopulle RC, Perera PP. Vaginal discharge assessment form for utilization by primary health care workers in a community setting. J Gynecol Womens Health. 2018;9(3):555763. https://doi.org/10.19080/jgwh.2018.09.555763 DOI: https://doi.org/10.19080/JGWH.2018.09.555763

Singh S, Das V, Agarwal A, Dewan R, Mittal P, Bhamrah R, et al. A dedicated postpartum intrauterine device inserter: Pilot experience and proof of concept. Glob Health Sci Pract. 2016;4(1):132-40. https://doi.org/10.9745/GHSP-D-15-00355 DOI: https://doi.org/10.9745/GHSP-D-15-00355

Heller R, Johnstone A, Cameron ST. Routine provision of intrauterine contraception at elective cesarean section in a national public health service: A service evaluation. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2017;96(9):1144-51. https://doi.org/10.1111/aogs.13178 PMid:28590560 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/aogs.13178

Cooper M, McGeechan K, Glasier A, Coutts S, McGuire F, Harden J, et al. Provision of immediate postpartum intrauterine contraception after vaginal birth within a public maternity setting: Health services research evaluation. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2020;99(5):598-607. https://doi.org/10.1111/aogs.13787 PMid:31837002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/aogs.13787

Braaten KP, Benson CB, Maurer R, Goldberg AB. Malpositioned intrauterine contraceptive devices: Risk factors, outcomes, and future pregnancies. Obstet Gynecol. 2011;118(5):1014-20. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e3182316308 PMid:22015868 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e3182316308

Singh U, Sonkar S, Yadav P, Dayal M, Gupta V, Saxena S. Comparative evaluation of postpartum IUCD versus interval IUCD at a tertiary care centre in Allahabad, India. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2017;6(4):1534. https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20171423 DOI: https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20171423

Makins A, Taghinejadi N, Sethi M, Machiyama K, Munganyizi P, Odongo E, et al. FIGO postpartum intrauterine device initiative: Complication rates across six countries. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2018;143(1):20-7. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.12600 PMid:30225873 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.12600

Muganyizi PS, Kimario G, Ponsian P, Howard K, Sethi M. Clinical outcomes of postpartum intrauterine devices inserted by midwives in Tanzania. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2018;143(1):38-42. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.12603