选择皮下植入与宫内节育器的女性差异。

IF 0.2 4区 医学 Q4 Medicine 生殖医学杂志 Pub Date : 2016-11-01
Vien C Lam, Emily E Hadley, Abbey B Berenson, Jacqueline M Hirth, Kristofer Jennings, Pooja R Patel
{"title":"选择皮下植入与宫内节育器的女性差异。","authors":"Vien C Lam,&nbsp;Emily E Hadley,&nbsp;Abbey B Berenson,&nbsp;Jacqueline M Hirth,&nbsp;Kristofer Jennings,&nbsp;Pooja R Patel","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To determine if there are any differences in the patient populations that choose subdermal implants versus intrauterine devices (IUDs) for contraceptive purposes.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Retrospective chart review. Electronic medical records of women who presented to the University of Texas Medical Branch in Galveston's Regional Maternal Child Health Program Clinics in southeast Texas from March 2011 to March 2013 and received a subdermal implant or IUD were reviewed. Differences in characteristics of women who chose either form of contraception were determined.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 356 charts were reviewed. Of those, 188 (53%) women chose the subdermal implant and 168 (47%) chose an IUD. Patients who chose subdermal implants were more likely to have had a long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARC) method previously (p<0.01), previous vaginal deliveries (p<0.001), and an interval from delivery to LARC placement of >1 year (p<0.001). LARC choice was race-specific in that, when compared to Caucasian women, African-American women were significantly more likely to choose an IUD, while Hispanic women were significantly more likely to choose subdermal implants (p=0.002).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Different populations choose subdermal implants versus IUDs for contraception. Further research is needed to determine etiologies for these differences.</p>","PeriodicalId":50063,"journal":{"name":"生殖医学杂志","volume":"61 11-12","pages":"529-33"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2016-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Differences in Women Who Choose Subdermal Implants Versus Intrauterine Devices.\",\"authors\":\"Vien C Lam,&nbsp;Emily E Hadley,&nbsp;Abbey B Berenson,&nbsp;Jacqueline M Hirth,&nbsp;Kristofer Jennings,&nbsp;Pooja R Patel\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To determine if there are any differences in the patient populations that choose subdermal implants versus intrauterine devices (IUDs) for contraceptive purposes.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Retrospective chart review. Electronic medical records of women who presented to the University of Texas Medical Branch in Galveston's Regional Maternal Child Health Program Clinics in southeast Texas from March 2011 to March 2013 and received a subdermal implant or IUD were reviewed. Differences in characteristics of women who chose either form of contraception were determined.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 356 charts were reviewed. Of those, 188 (53%) women chose the subdermal implant and 168 (47%) chose an IUD. Patients who chose subdermal implants were more likely to have had a long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARC) method previously (p<0.01), previous vaginal deliveries (p<0.001), and an interval from delivery to LARC placement of >1 year (p<0.001). LARC choice was race-specific in that, when compared to Caucasian women, African-American women were significantly more likely to choose an IUD, while Hispanic women were significantly more likely to choose subdermal implants (p=0.002).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Different populations choose subdermal implants versus IUDs for contraception. Further research is needed to determine etiologies for these differences.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50063,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"生殖医学杂志\",\"volume\":\"61 11-12\",\"pages\":\"529-33\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"生殖医学杂志\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"生殖医学杂志","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:确定选择皮下植入物与宫内节育器(iud)避孕的患者群体是否存在差异。研究设计:回顾性图表回顾。研究人员回顾了2011年3月至2013年3月在德克萨斯州东南部加尔维斯顿地区妇幼保健计划诊所的德克萨斯大学医学分部接受皮下植入或宫内节育器的妇女的电子医疗记录。研究确定了选择两种避孕方式的妇女的特征差异。结果:共审查了356张图表。其中,188名(53%)女性选择皮下植入,168名(47%)女性选择宫内节育器。选择皮下植入的患者更有可能在1年前使用过长效可逆避孕(LARC)方法(结论:不同人群选择皮下植入与宫内节育器避孕。需要进一步的研究来确定这些差异的病因。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Differences in Women Who Choose Subdermal Implants Versus Intrauterine Devices.

Objective: To determine if there are any differences in the patient populations that choose subdermal implants versus intrauterine devices (IUDs) for contraceptive purposes.

Study design: Retrospective chart review. Electronic medical records of women who presented to the University of Texas Medical Branch in Galveston's Regional Maternal Child Health Program Clinics in southeast Texas from March 2011 to March 2013 and received a subdermal implant or IUD were reviewed. Differences in characteristics of women who chose either form of contraception were determined.

Results: A total of 356 charts were reviewed. Of those, 188 (53%) women chose the subdermal implant and 168 (47%) chose an IUD. Patients who chose subdermal implants were more likely to have had a long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARC) method previously (p<0.01), previous vaginal deliveries (p<0.001), and an interval from delivery to LARC placement of >1 year (p<0.001). LARC choice was race-specific in that, when compared to Caucasian women, African-American women were significantly more likely to choose an IUD, while Hispanic women were significantly more likely to choose subdermal implants (p=0.002).

Conclusion: Different populations choose subdermal implants versus IUDs for contraception. Further research is needed to determine etiologies for these differences.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
生殖医学杂志
生殖医学杂志 医学-妇产科学
自引率
0.00%
发文量
6427
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Reproductive Medicine® has been the essential tool of Obstetricians and Gynecologists since 1968. As a highly regarded professional journal and the official periodical of six medical associations, JRM® brings timely and relevant information on the latest procedures and advances in the field of reproductive medicine. Published bimonthly, JRM® contains peer-reviewed articles and case reports submitted by top specialists. Common topics include research, clinical practice, and case reports related to general obstetrics and gynecology, infertility, female cancers, gynecologic surgery, contraception, and medical education.
期刊最新文献
Role of Capecitabine in the Management of Gestational Trophoblastic Neoplasia: A Drug for Two Settings. Comparison of Loop Electrosurgical Excision Procedure Using a Ring-Shaped Loop Versus a Right-Angled Triangular Loop. Gene Expression Analysis Identifies Common and Distinct Signatures Underlying Ductal and Lobular Breast Cancers. Analysis of Related Causes for No Embryos Transferred and Corresponding Coping Measures in Assisted Reproductive Technology. Cesarean Section Rates and Clinical Indications at a Large North African Hospital.
×
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