Hernández-Valencia M, García ML , Landero MOME,Escamilla GG , Zárate LAA

Language: Spanish
References: 14
Page: 93-97
PDF size: 63.51 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Introduction:A short time between pregnancies (intergestational span) has been associated with maternal and fetal risks. This obstetric risk is the cause of 60% of maternal mortality and of 75% of perinatal mortality. Thus, to prolong intergestational span in open population can give rise to important reductions in maternal-fetal mortality. Objective: To evaluate average intergestational span obtained with each non- final contraceptive methods in open population. Material and methods: We included consecutively a total of 173 fertile women with regular sexual life, who accepted to use interval methods of contraception. Results: The group had an average age of 28.6 ± 7.7 years. Methods used prior to first pregnancy showed that the intrauterine device (IUD), oral contraception (OC), and injectable hormone (IH) are the contraceptive methods that provided greater intergestational span. After the first pregnancy the IUD was the method that afforded a greater intergestational span with 41.6 ± 7.3 months, as well as with 40.5 ± 7.5 months. After the second pregnancy IH with 66.0 ± 4.2 months and the condom, with 54.5 ± 6.5 months, had best average. After the third pregnancy, the best mean was with condom use (40.0 ± 9.2). All these means had significant differences (p < 0.05) upon comparing them before each pregnancy. Discussion: Care provided in this study conferred intergestational span of > 24 months in careful users, which is considered the cut off point when referring to adequate intergestational span. It is confirmed that interval contraception has the advantage of being safe, effective, and users accept it for long periods of time.

REFERENCES

1. Vikat B, Kosunen E, Rimpela M. Risk of postpartum induced abortion in Finland: a register-based study. Perspect Sex Reprod Health 2002; 34: 84-90.

2. Paterson J, Tumana Cowley E, Percival T, Williams M. Pregnancy planning by mothers of Pacific infants recently delivered at Middlemore Hospital. N Z Med J 2004; 117: 742-744.

3. Hiller JE, Griffith E, Jenner F. Education for contraceptive use by women after childbirth Cochrane. Database Syst Rev 2002; 3: 1863-1865.

4. Hernández-Valencia M, Pavón-Rojas AB, Ferrer-Ponce LA, Álvarez-Muñoz M. Embarazo janiceps, cephalothoracoabdominopago. Ginec Obst Méx 1998; 66: 499-502.

5. Urbina-Fuentes M, Palma-Cabrera J, Gómez CA. El impacto de la planificación familiar en algunos indicadores del bienestar social. Gac Med Mex 1991; 127: 153-161.

6. Hernández-Valencia M, Carrillo PA. Control prenatal asociado al número de consultas como método diagnóstico de hiperglucemia. Ginec Obst Mex 2002; 70: 592-596.

7. Jones M. The biggest contraceptive in the world. New Int 1982; 110: 20-24.

8. Goodyear-Smith FA, Arroll B. Contraception before and after termination of pregnancy. N Z Med J 2003; 116: 1186-1188.

9. Steiner M, Piedrahita C, Glover L, Joanis C. Can condom users likely to experience condom failure be identified? Fam Plan Perspect 1993; 25: 220-226.

10. Aznar R, Reynoso L, Montemayor G, Giner J. Post-placental insertion of IUDs. Contracept Deliv Syst 1980; 2: 143-148.

11. Farr G, Amatya R, Doh A, Ekwempu CC, Toppozada M, Ruminjo J. An evaluation of the Copper-T 380A IUD´s safety and efficacy at three African centers. Contraception 1996; 53: 293-298.

12. Van Der Pas MT, Delbeke L, Van Dets H. Comparative performance of two copper-wired IUDs (ML Cu 250 and T Cu 200): immediate postpartum and interval insertion. Contracept Deliv Syst 1980; 1: 27-35.

13. Morrison C, Waszak C, Katz K, Diabate F, Mate EM. Clinical outcomes of two early postpartum IUD insertion programs in Africa. Contraception 1996; 53: 17-21.

14. Hardee K, Gould BJ. A process for quality improvement in family planning services. Inter Fam Plann Perspect 1993; 19: 147-152.