Search

Study objectiveProvider misconceptions regarding intrauterine device (IUD) safety for adolescents and young women can unnecessarily limit contraceptive options offered; we sought to evaluate rates of Neisseria gonorrhoeae or Chlamydia trachomatis (GC/CT) diagnoses among young women who adopted IUDs.DesignSecondary analysis of a cluster-randomized provider educational trial.SettingForty US-based reproductive health centers.ParticipantsWe followed 1350 participants for 12 months aged 18-25 years who sought contraceptive care.InterventionsThe parent study assessed the effect of provider training on evidence-based contraceptive counseling.Main outcome measuresWe assessed incidence of GC/CT diagnoses according to IUD use and sexually transmitted infection risk factors using Cox regression modeling and generalized estimating equations.ResultsTwo hundred four participants had GC/CT history at baseline; 103 received a new GC/CT diagnosis over the 12-month follow-up period. IUDs were initiated by 194 participants. Incidence of GC/CT diagnosis was 10.0 per 100 person-years during IUD use vs 8.0 otherwise. In adjusted models, IUD use (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.31; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71-2.40), adolescent age (aHR, 1.28; 95% CI, 0.72-2.27), history of GC/CT (aHR, 1.23; 95% CI, 0.75-2.00), and intervention status (aHR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.74-1.71) were not associated with GC/CT diagnosis; however, new GC/CT diagnosis rates were significantly higher among individuals who reported multiple partners at baseline (aHR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.34-2.98).ConclusionIn this young study population with GC/CT history, this use of IUDs was safe and did not lead to increased GC/CT diagnoses. However, results highlighted the importance of dual sexually transmitted infection and pregnancy protection for participants with multiple partners.

As a result of advances in cancer diagnosis and treatment, young women within the reproductive-aged group are now more likely to survive cancer. Reproductive-aged women with cancer may be interested in deferring pregnancy either temporarily or permanently at cancer diagnosis, during therapy or after treatment. Currently, there are limited guidelines to aide clinicians in managing the contraceptive needs in this special population. After reviewing the evidence regarding the safety and efficacy of available methods of contraception for women who have been diagnosed with cancer, the Society of Family Planning recommends that women of childbearing age who are being treated for cancer avoid combined hormonal contraceptive methods (containing estrogen and progestin) when possible because they may further increase the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) (Level A). The copper T380A intrauterine device, a highly effective, reversible, long-acting, hormone-free method, should be considered the first-line contraceptive option for women with a history of breast cancer (Level A), although for women being treated with tamoxifen, the levonorgestrel-containing intrauterine system (IUS) which decreases endometrial proliferation may be preferable (Level B). Women who develop anemia may benefit from use of a progestin-containing contraceptive (Level A). Women who develop osteopenia or osteoporosis following chemotherapy should avoid the progestin-only contraceptive injection (Level B). More information is needed in many areas. There are insufficient data to evaluate the risk of VTE when progestin-only contraceptives are used by women at high risk of VTE. Information is also needed on whether the levonorgestrel-containing IUS affects the risk of breast cancer recurrence and whether hormonal contraceptives affect the risk of breast cancer among women who have received chest wall, or "mantle field," radiation. Finally, studies of the safety and effectiveness of IUS use by women who are immunosuppressed and studies of whether progestin-only contraceptives affect the risk of fracture among cancer survivors or, more generally, women with osteopenia would be useful.

The concept of male subfertility has evolved rapidly since 2000. This term is discussed based upon evidence relating to its first entrance into the literature, along with contemporary references to its purported incidence and prevalence. Factors affecting sperm quality are described in detail, and available data pertaining to the effects of micronutrients on spermatic parameters and resulting pregnancies are described. The first costefficiency analysis of the use of micronutrients vs. assisted reproductive technologies is presented. This paper also describes a therapeutic approach to males, recognizing that many potential fathers have no recourse to medical facilities to evaluate their fertility. At a time when medical dollars are either nonexistent or precious, such an approach using micronutrient supplementation may be cost-effective in developing and possibly even in developed countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]