Acceptability of intrauterine contraception among women living with human immunodeficiency virus: a randomised clinical trial

O. Kakaire, N. Tumwesigye, J. Byamugisha, K. Gemzell‐Danielsson
{"title":"Acceptability of intrauterine contraception among women living with human immunodeficiency virus: a randomised clinical trial","authors":"O. Kakaire, N. Tumwesigye, J. Byamugisha, K. Gemzell‐Danielsson","doi":"10.3109/13625187.2016.1146249","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Objectives: The aim of our study was to compare acceptability of the copper intrauterine device (Cu-IUD) and levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) among women living with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Methods: We randomly assigned 703 HIV-positive women in Uganda to receive either a Cu-IUD or an LNG-IUS and followed them for at least one year. During the follow-up visits, face-to-face interviews were conducted with the women and acceptability of the Cu-IUD or LNG-IUS was assessed, using a Likert scale, at one, three, six and twelve months. At the final follow-up visit, women were also assessed for satisfaction with either method. Results: Between 9 September 2013 and 31 December 2014, 703 women were recruited and assigned as follows: 349 to a Cu-IUD group and 354 to an LNG-IUS group. Acceptability decreased from 94.3% at one month to 87.7% at 12 months in the Cu-IUD group and from 96.3% at one month to 86.7% at 12 months in the LNG-IUS group (p = 0.97). Satisfaction with intrauterine contraception was reported by 83.7% (283/338) in the Cu-IUD group and by 90.4% (302/334) in the LNG-IUS group (p = 0.50). Conclusions: There was no significant difference in acceptability between the LNG-IUS and Cu-IUD among HIV-positive women. Satisfaction rates were high and similar in the two groups. Both the Cu-IUD and LNG-IUS are acceptable forms of contraception for HIV-positive women and should be made available to women in HIV care to increase their contraceptive method options. Clinical trial registration: The trial is registered at the Pan African Clinical Trials Registry (PACTR 201308000561212).","PeriodicalId":22423,"journal":{"name":"The European Journal of Contraception & Reproductive Health Care","volume":"61 1","pages":"220 - 226"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-02-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The European Journal of Contraception & Reproductive Health Care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3109/13625187.2016.1146249","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

Abstract Objectives: The aim of our study was to compare acceptability of the copper intrauterine device (Cu-IUD) and levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) among women living with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Methods: We randomly assigned 703 HIV-positive women in Uganda to receive either a Cu-IUD or an LNG-IUS and followed them for at least one year. During the follow-up visits, face-to-face interviews were conducted with the women and acceptability of the Cu-IUD or LNG-IUS was assessed, using a Likert scale, at one, three, six and twelve months. At the final follow-up visit, women were also assessed for satisfaction with either method. Results: Between 9 September 2013 and 31 December 2014, 703 women were recruited and assigned as follows: 349 to a Cu-IUD group and 354 to an LNG-IUS group. Acceptability decreased from 94.3% at one month to 87.7% at 12 months in the Cu-IUD group and from 96.3% at one month to 86.7% at 12 months in the LNG-IUS group (p = 0.97). Satisfaction with intrauterine contraception was reported by 83.7% (283/338) in the Cu-IUD group and by 90.4% (302/334) in the LNG-IUS group (p = 0.50). Conclusions: There was no significant difference in acceptability between the LNG-IUS and Cu-IUD among HIV-positive women. Satisfaction rates were high and similar in the two groups. Both the Cu-IUD and LNG-IUS are acceptable forms of contraception for HIV-positive women and should be made available to women in HIV care to increase their contraceptive method options. Clinical trial registration: The trial is registered at the Pan African Clinical Trials Registry (PACTR 201308000561212).
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
人类免疫缺陷病毒感染妇女宫内避孕的可接受性:一项随机临床试验
摘要目的:本研究的目的是比较铜宫内节育器(Cu-IUD)和左炔诺孕酮释放宫内系统(LNG-IUS)在人类免疫缺陷病毒(HIV)感染者中的可接受性。方法:我们在乌干达随机分配703名艾滋病毒阳性妇女接受Cu-IUD或LNG-IUS,并随访至少一年。在随访期间,与妇女进行面对面访谈,并在1个月、3个月、6个月和12个月时使用李克特量表评估Cu-IUD或LNG-IUS的可接受性。在最后的随访中,研究人员还评估了女性对两种方法的满意度。结果:在2013年9月9日至2014年12月31日期间,招募了703名妇女,并将其分配如下:349名妇女进入Cu-IUD组,354名妇女进入LNG-IUS组。Cu-IUD组可接受度从1个月时的94.3%下降到12个月时的87.7%,LNG-IUS组从1个月时的96.3%下降到12个月时的86.7% (p = 0.97)。Cu-IUD组对宫内避孕的满意度为83.7% (283/338),LNG-IUS组为90.4%(302/334),差异有统计学意义(p = 0.50)。结论:hiv阳性妇女对LNG-IUS和Cu-IUD的可接受性无显著差异。两组的满意率都很高,而且相似。对于艾滋病毒阳性妇女来说,Cu-IUD和LNG-IUS都是可接受的避孕方式,应向艾滋病毒护理的妇女提供,以增加她们的避孕方法选择。临床试验注册:该试验在泛非临床试验注册中心(PACTR 201308000561212)注册。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Pain relief during intrauterine device placement in nulligravid women with both oral ketorolac and an analgesic: a double-blinded randomised trial Legal abortion requests and outcomes for women when the law is restrictive – experience from a referral centre in south-eastern Brazil ‘Do I want children later in life?’ Reproductive intentions of 1700 adolescents Oestrogens in oral contraception: considerations for tailoring prescription to women’s needs Prevalence of high-risk HPV and cervical dysplasia in IUD users and controls: a cross sectional study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1