Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A comparison of the clinical performance, contraceptive efficacy, reversibility and acceptability of Norplant implants and Ortho Gynae T380 intrauterine copper contraceptive device

  • Published:
Advances in Contraception

Abstract

In this comparative study, the five-year continuity rate of 53.7% in the Norplant implants group was comparable to that of 52.7% in the copper IUD group. The difference was not statistically significant. Only one accidental pregnancy occurred during the five years of copper IUD use.

Desire for future pregnancy was the main reason for removal in the Norplant implants group (35.9%) while expulsion of the IUD (13.2%) was the main reason for removal of the copper IUD. Menstrual disturbance was not a major side-effect in either group.

The post-removal conception rates of 78.6% in the Norplant implants group and 75.0% in the copper IUD were good and comparable.

Both the Norplant implants and copper IUD are acceptable and effective contraceptive methods in Singapore.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Basnayaka S, Thapa S, Balogh SA. Evaluation of safety, efficacy, and acceptability of Norplant implants in Sri Lanka. Stud Fam Plann. 1988;19:39–48.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Sivin I. International experience with Norplant and Norplant-2 contraceptives. Stud Fam Plann. 1988;19:81–94.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Gao J, Wang SL, Wu SC, Sun BL, Hannu A, Tapani L. Comparison of the clinical performance, contraceptive efficacy and acceptability of levonorgestrel releasing IUD and Norplant implants in China. Contraception. 1990;41(5):485–94.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Affandi B, Santoso SSI, Djajadilaga D et al. Pregnancy after removal of Norplant implants contraceptive. Contraception. 1987;36:203–9.

    Google Scholar 

  5. World Health Organisation. Post-marketing Surveillance of Norplant Collaborating Agencies Progress Report. World Health Organisation. 1995:1–39.

  6. Mishell DR. Overview of contraception. In: Wallace EE, Zucker HA, eds. Reproductive Medicine and Surgery. Baltimore, MD, USA: Moseby; 1995:289–316.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Diaz S, Pavez M, Cardenas H, Croxatto HB. Recovery of fertility and outcome of planned pregnancies after the removal of Norplant subdermal implants or copper-T IUDs. Contraception. 1987;35:569–79.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Shaaban MM, Salah M, Zarzour A, Abdullah SA. A prospective study of Norplant implants and the TCu 380Ag IUD in Assiut, Egypt. Stud Fam Plann. 1983;19:81–94.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, National University Hospital, Lower Kent Ridge Road, Singapore, 119074

    K. Singh & S.S. Ratnam

Authors
  1. K. Singh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. S.S. Ratnam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Singh, K., Ratnam, S. A comparison of the clinical performance, contraceptive efficacy, reversibility and acceptability of Norplant implants and Ortho Gynae T380 intrauterine copper contraceptive device. Advances in Contraception 13, 385–393 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006580325110

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006580325110

Keywords

Search

Navigation