Journal of South Asian Federation of Obstetrics and Gynaecology

Register      Login

VOLUME 10 , ISSUE 2 ( April-June, 2018 ) > List of Articles


Evaluation of Acceptance, Safety, and Expulsion of Postplacental Intrauterine Contraceptive Devices

Iysverya Gnanasekar

Keywords : Copper T 380A, Intrauterine contraceptive device, Postplacental intrauterine contraceptive device

Citation Information : Gnanasekar I. Evaluation of Acceptance, Safety, and Expulsion of Postplacental Intrauterine Contraceptive Devices. J South Asian Feder Obs Gynae 2018; 10 (2):118-122.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10006-1572

Published Online: 01-12-2017

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2018; The Author(s).


Aims and objectives: • To determine the proportion of women accepting immediate PPIUCD insertion. • To determine the rates of expulsion, pelvic infection, lost strings, and displacement following PPIUCD insertion among the acceptors by 6 weeks. Materials and methods: The material used in this study was copper T 380A.The modified kelly's forceps was used for the post placental insertion of copper T into the uterine cavity under aseptic precautions. Results: The acceptance rate of copper T in this study was 26.44. • The expulsion rate of copper T at the end of 6 weeks was 2.22% • There were no cases of pelvic infection or displacement of copper T in this study. Conclusion: The acceptance rate of copper T was poor which was mainly attributable to the lack of sufficient knowledge about copper T and the false beliefs regarding the impact the copper T has on the health of the individual. However in those women who accepted for copper T insertion were satisfied with the copper T as a temporary method of contraception.

PDF Share
  1. Gupta A, Verma A, Chauhan J. Evaluation of PPIUCD versus interval IUCD (380A) insertion in a teaching hospital of Western UP. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol 2013;2(2):204208.
  2. Postpartum IUCD Reference Manual, Family Planning Division. Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India, New Delhi, India; 2010.
  3. Asif R, Charunat E, Das S, Kumar S, Rath M, Saha S, Sethi R, Srivastava V, Yadav V. Revitalisation of PPIUCD services experience from India, Jhpiego/India (New Delhi). Contraception 2012 Aug;86(2):184-185.
  4. Chi I. What we have learned from recent IUD studies: a researcher's perspective. Contraception 2003;68:3-10.
  5. Fortney JA, Feldblum PJ, Raymond EG. Intrauterine devices. The optimal long-term contraceptive method? J Reprod Med 1999 Mar;44(3):269-274. Table 13: Reasons for removal of copper T Reasons N = 3 Percent Fear of bleeding and weight gain 2 2.22 Family's advice to remove 1 1.11 Total 3 3.33 Table 14: Continuation rate Continuation rate N = 87 Percent Wanted to continue 79 82.29 Wanted to continue after counseling 8 8.33 Total 87 90.62 Table 15: Expulsion rate at 6 weeks Expulsion rate N = 90 Percent Expelled 2 2.22 Not expelled 88 97.78 Total 90 100
  6. d'Arcangues C. Worldwide use of intrauterine devices for contraception. Contraception 2007 Jun;75(6 Suppl):S2-S7.
  7. Bühling KJ, Zite NB, Lotke P, Black K, INTRA Writing Group. Worldwide use of intrauterine contraception: a review. Contraception 2014;89(3):162-173.
  8. Kulier R, O'Brien PA, Helmerhorst FM, Usher-Patel M, D'Arcangues C. Copper containing, framed intrauterine devices for contraception. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007 Oct 17;(4):CD005347.
  9. United Nations Development Programme, United Nations Population Fund, World Health Organization, World Bank, Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction. Long-term reversible contraception. Twelve years of experience with the TCu380A and TCu220C. Contraception 1997 Dec;56(6):341-352.
  10. Andersson K, Ryde-Blomqvist E, Lindell K, Odlind V, Milson I. Perforations with intrauterine devices. Contraception 2014;89(3);162-173.
  11. Garuda L, Kambham S, Neelohita B. Clinical outcome of PPIUCD (Copper-380A)—Intracesarean insertion. Indian J Obstet Gynaecol Res 2015;2(4):218-226.
  12. Mishra S. Evaluation of safety, efficacy, and expulsion of post-placental and intra-cesarean insertion of intrauterine contraceptive devices (PPIUCD). J Obstet Gynecol India 2014Sep-Oct;64(5):337-343.
  13. Srivastava S, Bano I. Acceptability of PPIUCD versus interval IUCD insertion. Int J Sci Res 2016 Aug;5(8):364-367.
  14. Sultana R, Jameel A, Amjad A. Immediate postpartum insertion of intrauterine device: an ideal method. JSOGP 2015;5(1).
  15. Afshan A, Asim S. Immediate postpartum IUCD (PPIUCD) insertion : an opportunity not to be missed. Ann Abbasi Shaheed Hosp Karachi Med Dent Coll 2014 Jun;19(1):15-20.
  16. Halder A, Sowmya MS, Gayen A, Bhattacharya P, Mukherjee S, Datta S. A prospective study to evaluate vaginal insertion and intra-cesarean insertion of post-partum intrauterine device. J Obstet Gynecol India 2016 Jan-Feb;66(1):35-41.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.