Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2010 Feb;81(2):112-6.
doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2009.08.002. Epub 2009 Sep 16.

Intrauterine contraception in Saint Louis: a survey of obstetrician and gynecologists' knowledge and attitudes

Affiliations

Intrauterine contraception in Saint Louis: a survey of obstetrician and gynecologists' knowledge and attitudes

Tessa Madden et al. Contraception. 2010 Feb.

Abstract

Background: Many obstacles to intrauterine contraception (IUC) use exist, including provider and patient misinformation, high upfront cost and clinician practice patterns. The aim of our study was to investigate knowledge and attitudes about IUC among obstetricians and gynecologists in the area of Saint Louis.

Study design: We mailed a self-administered, anonymous survey to 250 clinicians who provide obstetric and gynecologic care in Saint Louis City and County which included questions about demographics, training, family planning visits and intrauterine contraceptive knowledge and use.

Results: The overall survey response rate among eligible clinicians was 73.7%. Clinicians who had recently finished training or saw higher numbers of contraceptive patients per week were more likely to insert IUC than clinicians who completed training prior to 1989 or saw fewer contraceptive patients. Several misconceptions among clinicians were identified, including an association between intrauterine contraceptives and an elevated risk of pelvic inflammatory disease.

Conclusions: Physician misconceptions about the risks of IUC continue to occur. Improved clinician education is greatly needed to facilitate the use of these highly effective, long-acting, reversible methods of contraception.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Schematic of mailed and returned questionnaires.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Finer LB, Henshaw SK. Disparities in rates of unintended pregnancy in the United States, 1994 and 2001. Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2006;38:90–96. - PubMed
    1. Trussell J. Contraceptive Efficacy. In: Hatcher RATJ, Nelson AL, Cates W, Stewart FH, Kowal D, editors. Contraceptive Technology. New York (NY): Ardent Media; 2007. pp. 747–760.
    1. Suhonen S, Haukkamaa M, Jakobsson T, Rauramo I. Clinical performance of a levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system and oral contraceptives in young nulliparous women: a comparative study. Contraception. 2004;69:407–412. - PubMed
    1. Baldaszti E, Wimmer B, Loschke K. Acceptability of the long-term contraceptive levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (Mirena): a 3-year follow-up study. Contraception. 2003;67:87–91. - PubMed
    1. Ortayli N, Bulut A, Sahin T, Sivin I. Immediate postabortal contraception with the levonorgestrel intrauterine device, Norplant, and traditional methods. Contraception. 2001;63:309–314. - PubMed

Publication types