Copper intrauterine device placement 6–14 days after unprotected sex

I. Thompson; Jessica N. Sanders; E. Bimla Schwarz; Christy Boraas; David K. Turok

doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2019.05.015

Copper intrauterine device placement 6–14 days after unprotected sex

I. Thompson, Jessica N. Sanders, E. Bimla Schwarz, Christy Boraas, David K. Turok

Obstetrics, Gynecology and Women's Health

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

12 Scopus citations

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate pregnancy risk following copper (CuT380A) intrauterine device (IUD) placement 6–14 days after unprotected intercourse. Study design: We used a combined dataset from four protocols in which participants had received a CuT380A IUD regardless of recent unprotected intercourse. At entry, participants had negative point of care urine pregnancy testing and reported all acts of unprotected intercourse in the two weeks prior to IUD placement. We identified a subset of women who had placement 6–14 days after unprotected intercourse and provided follow-up information on pregnancy status 2–4 weeks after IUD insertion. This follow-up within the four protocols included self -administered home urine pregnancy test (UPT) results 2–4 weeks after IUD placement or continued contact for up to 6 months. Results: We identified 134 women who had a CuT380A IUD placed 6–14 days after unprotected intercourse and provided follow-up information on pregnancy status. Ninety-five (71%) participants reported UPT results 2–4 weeks after placement and the other 39 women were followed for 6 months after IUD placement to assess pregnancy status. Zero (97.5% CI 0–2.7%) participants reported a pregnancy within four weeks of CuT380A IUD placement. Conclusion: In these collected data, no women with recent unprotected intercourse became pregnant within 1 month of CuT380A IUD placement. Implication: These data indicate a low likelihood of pregnancy among women who reported unprotected intercourse 6–14 days preceding IUD insertion. For many women and their providers, these data may be sufficient to support same-day placement of a copper IUD rather than delaying IUD placement until the next menses.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	219-221
Number of pages	3
Journal	Contraception
Volume	100
Issue number	3
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2019.05.015
State	Published - Sep 2019

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
Funding: This work was supported by the Society of Family Planning Research Fund Grant # SFPRF15-2 and the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation. We collected and managed study data using REDCap (Research Electronic Data Capture) software hosted at the University of Utah; this service is supported by Center for Clinical and Translational Sciences grant 8UL1TR000105 (formerly UL1RR025764, NCATS/NIH). All authors played a crucial role in the combined effort of researching and writing this paper. Team members receive support from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health & Human Development and the Office of Research on Women's Health of the National Institute of Health, JNS via Award Number K12HD085852 and DKT via K24HD087436 and 1R01HD083340. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official view of any of the funding agencies or participating institutions, including the National Institutes of Health, the University of Utah or Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc.

Funding Information:
Special thanks to Kathy Burke, Penny Davies, and the staff at Planned Parenthood Association of Utah and Planned Parenthood of Minnesota.☆ Funding: This work was supported by the Society of Family Planning Research Fund Grant # SFPRF15-2 and the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation. We collected and managed study data using REDCap (Research Electronic Data Capture) software hosted at the University of Utah; this service is supported by Center for Clinical and Translational Sciences grant 8UL1TR000105 (formerly UL1RR025764, NCATS/NIH). All authors played a crucial role in the combined effort of researching and writing this paper. Team members receive support from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health & Human Development and the Office of Research on Women's Health of the National Institute of Health, JNS via Award Number K12HD085852 and DKT via K24HD087436 and 1R01HD083340. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official view of any of the funding agencies or participating institutions, including the National Institutes of Health, the University of Utah or Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc. ☆☆ Conflict of Interest: The University of Utah Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology Program in Family Planning receives research funding from Bayer Women's Health Care, Merck & Co. Inc., Cooper Surgical, Bioceptive, Sebela Pharmaceuticals, and Medicines 360. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to report.

Funding Information:
Conflict of Interest: The University of Utah Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology Program in Family Planning receives research funding from Bayer Women's Health Care, Merck & Co. Inc., Cooper Surgical, Bioceptive, Sebela Pharmaceuticals, and Medicines 360. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to report.

Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 Elsevier Inc.

Keywords

Copper IUD
Pregnancy
Pregnancy rate
Unprotected intercourse

Access

10.1016/j.contraception.2019.05.015

OpenUrl availability

Full text

Cite this

@article{f63d111f6d02423290b8d7118ca8e9e4,

title = "Copper intrauterine device placement 6–14 days after unprotected sex",

abstract = "Objective: To evaluate pregnancy risk following copper (CuT380A) intrauterine device (IUD) placement 6–14 days after unprotected intercourse. Study design: We used a combined dataset from four protocols in which participants had received a CuT380A IUD regardless of recent unprotected intercourse. At entry, participants had negative point of care urine pregnancy testing and reported all acts of unprotected intercourse in the two weeks prior to IUD placement. We identified a subset of women who had placement 6–14 days after unprotected intercourse and provided follow-up information on pregnancy status 2–4 weeks after IUD insertion. This follow-up within the four protocols included self -administered home urine pregnancy test (UPT) results 2–4 weeks after IUD placement or continued contact for up to 6 months. Results: We identified 134 women who had a CuT380A IUD placed 6–14 days after unprotected intercourse and provided follow-up information on pregnancy status. Ninety-five (71%) participants reported UPT results 2–4 weeks after placement and the other 39 women were followed for 6 months after IUD placement to assess pregnancy status. Zero (97.5% CI 0–2.7%) participants reported a pregnancy within four weeks of CuT380A IUD placement. Conclusion: In these collected data, no women with recent unprotected intercourse became pregnant within 1 month of CuT380A IUD placement. Implication: These data indicate a low likelihood of pregnancy among women who reported unprotected intercourse 6–14 days preceding IUD insertion. For many women and their providers, these data may be sufficient to support same-day placement of a copper IUD rather than delaying IUD placement until the next menses.",

keywords = "Copper IUD, Pregnancy, Pregnancy rate, Unprotected intercourse",

author = "I. Thompson and Sanders, {Jessica N.} and Schwarz, {E. Bimla} and Christy Boraas and Turok, {David K.}",

note = "Funding Information: Funding: This work was supported by the Society of Family Planning Research Fund Grant # SFPRF15-2 and the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation. We collected and managed study data using REDCap (Research Electronic Data Capture) software hosted at the University of Utah; this service is supported by Center for Clinical and Translational Sciences grant 8UL1TR000105 (formerly UL1RR025764, NCATS/NIH). All authors played a crucial role in the combined effort of researching and writing this paper. Team members receive support from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health & Human Development and the Office of Research on Women's Health of the National Institute of Health, JNS via Award Number K12HD085852 and DKT via K24HD087436 and 1R01HD083340. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official view of any of the funding agencies or participating institutions, including the National Institutes of Health, the University of Utah or Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc. Funding Information: Special thanks to Kathy Burke, Penny Davies, and the staff at Planned Parenthood Association of Utah and Planned Parenthood of Minnesota.☆ Funding: This work was supported by the Society of Family Planning Research Fund Grant # SFPRF15-2 and the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation. We collected and managed study data using REDCap (Research Electronic Data Capture) software hosted at the University of Utah; this service is supported by Center for Clinical and Translational Sciences grant 8UL1TR000105 (formerly UL1RR025764, NCATS/NIH). All authors played a crucial role in the combined effort of researching and writing this paper. Team members receive support from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health & Human Development and the Office of Research on Women's Health of the National Institute of Health, JNS via Award Number K12HD085852 and DKT via K24HD087436 and 1R01HD083340. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official view of any of the funding agencies or participating institutions, including the National Institutes of Health, the University of Utah or Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc. ☆☆ Conflict of Interest: The University of Utah Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology Program in Family Planning receives research funding from Bayer Women's Health Care, Merck & Co. Inc., Cooper Surgical, Bioceptive, Sebela Pharmaceuticals, and Medicines 360. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to report. Funding Information: Conflict of Interest: The University of Utah Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology Program in Family Planning receives research funding from Bayer Women's Health Care, Merck & Co. Inc., Cooper Surgical, Bioceptive, Sebela Pharmaceuticals, and Medicines 360. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to report. Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2019 Elsevier Inc.",

year = "2019",

month = sep,

doi = "10.1016/j.contraception.2019.05.015",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "100",

pages = "219--221",

journal = "Contraception",

issn = "0010-7824",

publisher = "Elsevier USA",

number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Copper intrauterine device placement 6–14 days after unprotected sex

AU - Thompson, I.

AU - Sanders, Jessica N.

AU - Schwarz, E. Bimla

AU - Boraas, Christy

AU - Turok, David K.

N1 - Funding Information: Funding: This work was supported by the Society of Family Planning Research Fund Grant # SFPRF15-2 and the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation. We collected and managed study data using REDCap (Research Electronic Data Capture) software hosted at the University of Utah; this service is supported by Center for Clinical and Translational Sciences grant 8UL1TR000105 (formerly UL1RR025764, NCATS/NIH). All authors played a crucial role in the combined effort of researching and writing this paper. Team members receive support from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health & Human Development and the Office of Research on Women's Health of the National Institute of Health, JNS via Award Number K12HD085852 and DKT via K24HD087436 and 1R01HD083340. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official view of any of the funding agencies or participating institutions, including the National Institutes of Health, the University of Utah or Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc. Funding Information: Special thanks to Kathy Burke, Penny Davies, and the staff at Planned Parenthood Association of Utah and Planned Parenthood of Minnesota.☆ Funding: This work was supported by the Society of Family Planning Research Fund Grant # SFPRF15-2 and the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation. We collected and managed study data using REDCap (Research Electronic Data Capture) software hosted at the University of Utah; this service is supported by Center for Clinical and Translational Sciences grant 8UL1TR000105 (formerly UL1RR025764, NCATS/NIH). All authors played a crucial role in the combined effort of researching and writing this paper. Team members receive support from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health & Human Development and the Office of Research on Women's Health of the National Institute of Health, JNS via Award Number K12HD085852 and DKT via K24HD087436 and 1R01HD083340. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official view of any of the funding agencies or participating institutions, including the National Institutes of Health, the University of Utah or Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc. ☆☆ Conflict of Interest: The University of Utah Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology Program in Family Planning receives research funding from Bayer Women's Health Care, Merck & Co. Inc., Cooper Surgical, Bioceptive, Sebela Pharmaceuticals, and Medicines 360. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to report. Funding Information: Conflict of Interest: The University of Utah Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology Program in Family Planning receives research funding from Bayer Women's Health Care, Merck & Co. Inc., Cooper Surgical, Bioceptive, Sebela Pharmaceuticals, and Medicines 360. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to report. Publisher Copyright: © 2019 Elsevier Inc.

PY - 2019/9

Y1 - 2019/9

N2 - Objective: To evaluate pregnancy risk following copper (CuT380A) intrauterine device (IUD) placement 6–14 days after unprotected intercourse. Study design: We used a combined dataset from four protocols in which participants had received a CuT380A IUD regardless of recent unprotected intercourse. At entry, participants had negative point of care urine pregnancy testing and reported all acts of unprotected intercourse in the two weeks prior to IUD placement. We identified a subset of women who had placement 6–14 days after unprotected intercourse and provided follow-up information on pregnancy status 2–4 weeks after IUD insertion. This follow-up within the four protocols included self -administered home urine pregnancy test (UPT) results 2–4 weeks after IUD placement or continued contact for up to 6 months. Results: We identified 134 women who had a CuT380A IUD placed 6–14 days after unprotected intercourse and provided follow-up information on pregnancy status. Ninety-five (71%) participants reported UPT results 2–4 weeks after placement and the other 39 women were followed for 6 months after IUD placement to assess pregnancy status. Zero (97.5% CI 0–2.7%) participants reported a pregnancy within four weeks of CuT380A IUD placement. Conclusion: In these collected data, no women with recent unprotected intercourse became pregnant within 1 month of CuT380A IUD placement. Implication: These data indicate a low likelihood of pregnancy among women who reported unprotected intercourse 6–14 days preceding IUD insertion. For many women and their providers, these data may be sufficient to support same-day placement of a copper IUD rather than delaying IUD placement until the next menses.

AB - Objective: To evaluate pregnancy risk following copper (CuT380A) intrauterine device (IUD) placement 6–14 days after unprotected intercourse. Study design: We used a combined dataset from four protocols in which participants had received a CuT380A IUD regardless of recent unprotected intercourse. At entry, participants had negative point of care urine pregnancy testing and reported all acts of unprotected intercourse in the two weeks prior to IUD placement. We identified a subset of women who had placement 6–14 days after unprotected intercourse and provided follow-up information on pregnancy status 2–4 weeks after IUD insertion. This follow-up within the four protocols included self -administered home urine pregnancy test (UPT) results 2–4 weeks after IUD placement or continued contact for up to 6 months. Results: We identified 134 women who had a CuT380A IUD placed 6–14 days after unprotected intercourse and provided follow-up information on pregnancy status. Ninety-five (71%) participants reported UPT results 2–4 weeks after placement and the other 39 women were followed for 6 months after IUD placement to assess pregnancy status. Zero (97.5% CI 0–2.7%) participants reported a pregnancy within four weeks of CuT380A IUD placement. Conclusion: In these collected data, no women with recent unprotected intercourse became pregnant within 1 month of CuT380A IUD placement. Implication: These data indicate a low likelihood of pregnancy among women who reported unprotected intercourse 6–14 days preceding IUD insertion. For many women and their providers, these data may be sufficient to support same-day placement of a copper IUD rather than delaying IUD placement until the next menses.

KW - Copper IUD

KW - Pregnancy

KW - Pregnancy rate

KW - Unprotected intercourse

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85068235135&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85068235135&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.contraception.2019.05.015

DO - 10.1016/j.contraception.2019.05.015

M3 - Article

C2 - 31176689

AN - SCOPUS:85068235135

SN - 0010-7824

VL - 100

SP - 219

EP - 221

JO - Contraception

JF - Contraception

IS - 3

ER -

Copper intrauterine device placement 6–14 days after unprotected sex

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Keywords

Access

OpenUrl availability

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this