Search

Objective: This study aimed to compare removal timing, techniques, and success of malpositioned intrauterine device (IUDs) to nonmalpositioned IUDs., Study Design: We performed a retrospective cohort study of IUD users with ultrasound performed between July 2014 and July 2017 within one medical system. We used Fisher exact and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests to compare clinical characteristics and IUD removal details between patients with malpositioned and nonmalpositioned IUDs., Results: Of 1759 ultrasounds reporting the presence of an IUD, 436 described IUD malposition. Of these, 150 described the IUD as embedded and 16 as partially perforated. IUDs were more likely to be removed and removed sooner for patients with malpositioned compared with nonmalpositioned IUDs (281/436 vs 545/1323, p < 0.001 and median 17 days vs 236 days from the index ultrasound, p < 0.001). Most IUDs, malpositioned and nonmalpositioned, were removed on the first attempt (82%, 85%), by a generalist obstetrician and gynecologist (75%, 70%), using a ring forceps (73%, 65%). Most embedded and partially perforated IUDs were removed (68%, 69%), using a ring forceps (59%, 67%), on the first attempt (84%, 91%)., Conclusions: Malpositioned IUDs were more likely to be removed and removed sooner than nonmalpositioned IUDs. Most IUDs, even IUDs labeled as partially perforated or embedded, were removed by a generalist obstetrician and gynecologist, using ring forceps, on first attempt., Implications: Ultrasound findings of IUD malposition are not associated with difficult IUD removal., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: During theCOVID-19 pandemic, many clinicians increased provision of telemedicine services. This study describes patient experiences with telemedicine for contraceptive counseling during the COVID-19 pandemic in New York City., Study Design: This is a mixed-methods study which includes a web-based or phone survey and in-depth phone interviews with patients who had telemedicine visits for contraception., Results: A total of 169 patients had eligible telemedicine visits between April 1 and June 30, 2020. Of these, 86 (51%) responded to the survey, and 23 (14%) participated in the interviews. We found that 86% of survey respondents were very satisfied with the telemedicine visit, and 63% said it completely met their needs. A majority (73%) strongly agreed that these visits should be maintained after the COVID-19 pandemic, and half (51%) would be very likely to choose them over in-person visits. In-depth interviews highlighted the convenience of telemedicine, especially for those with work or parenting responsibilities. Although some patients had in-person visits after telehealth, many appreciated the counseling they received remotely, and found the subsequent in-person visits more efficient. Patients identified visits that do not require physical exams as ideal visits for telehealth, and some hoped that all or most of their future visits would be telehealth visits. Many patients (43%) expressed a preference for phone over video visits., Conclusions: Patients reported an overall positive experience with telemedicine visits for contraceptive counseling during the COVID-19 pandemic. They appreciated the convenience of telemedicine visits and valued the virtual counseling experience., Implications: Health care providers who initiated or expanded telemedicine services for contraceptive counseling during the COVID-19 pandemic should consider continuing to offer them after the pandemic. At the policy level, these findings favor expanding access to telemedicine and providing reimbursement for virtual visits, including telephone visits., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: During the COVID-19 pandemic, many clinicians started offering telemedicine services. The objective of this study is to describe the experience of US family planning providers with the rapid adoption of telemedicine for contraceptive counseling during this period., Study Design: This is a cross-sectional web-based survey of family planning providers practicing in the United States., Results: A total of 172 providers completed the survey (34% response rate). Of these, 156 (91%) provided telemedicine services in the 2 months preceding the survey. Most (78%) were new to telemedicine. About half (54%) referred less than a quarter of contraception patients for in-person visits, and 53% stated that the most common referral reason was long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARC) insertion. A majority of providers strongly agree that telemedicine visits are an effective way to provide contraceptive counseling (80%), and that this service should be expanded after the pandemic (84%). If asked to provide telemedicine visits after the pandemic, 64% of providers would be very happy about it. Many providers used personal phones or smartphones to conduct telemedicine visits but stated that ideal devices would be work-issued computers, tablets, or phones. More than half (59%) of providers prefer video over phone visits., Conclusions: Family planning clinicians in the United States reported a positive experience with telemedicine for contraceptive counseling during the early stage of the COVID-19 pandemic and believe that this service should be expanded. Clinicians seem to prefer using work-issued devices and conducting video rather than phone visits., Implications: Telemedicine is a promising option for providing contraceptive counseling even beyond the COVID-19 pandemic. An investment in hospital or clinic-issued devices that allow for video conferencing may optimize clinicians' telemedicine experience., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Inc.)