Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The Use of ACOG Guidelines: Perceived Contraindications to IUD and Implant Use Among Family Planning Providers

  • Published:
Maternal and Child Health Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives The uptake and actual use of the current guidelines from the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology (ACOG) is unknown. Methods Family planning providers across Colorado and Iowa were surveyed as part of statewide initiatives to reduce unintended pregnancy in 2010 and 2012, both before and after the release of the guidelines. These initiatives focused on the promotion of intrauterine devices (IUDs) and implants. These surveys included questions on providers’ views regarding the suitability and safety of the copper T IUD, hormonal IUD, and single rod implant for various subgroups of clients. The results are contrasted with guidelines provided in July of 2011 by ACOG. This strategy provides both baseline and follow-up models about the methods promoted in these guidelines. Results Findings show that there is some improvement in beliefs that IUDs are suitable and safe for women who are post-partum, post-abortion, have had an ectopic pregnancy, are nulliparous, teenagers, or have a history of STIs. However, these clinicians’ views are not entirely in alignment with ACOG recommendations in their beliefs that these methods should not be used immediately post-partum or post-abortion. Notable percentages of these clinicians were hesitant to recommend these effective methods for other groups of patients, approved for use by ACOG. Conclusions While the cost of these methods is a barrier to adoption, these data suggest that there are continuing provider barriers to their use as well. The paper concludes with suggestions for further training for family planning providers.

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

  • American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) (2009). Increasing use of contraceptive implants and intrauterine devices to reduce unintended pregnancy. Committee Opinion, 450(114), 1434–1438.

    Google Scholar 

  • American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) (2011). Long-acting reversible contraception: Implants and intrauterine devices. Practice Bulletin, 121, 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) (2012). Adolescents and long-acting reversible contraception: Implants and intrauterine devices. Committee Opinion, 539, 1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhathena, R. K., & Guillebaud, J. (2008). Intrauterine contraception: An update. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 28(3), 262–265.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Biggs, M. A., Harper, C. C., Malvin, J., & Brindis, C. D. (2014). Factors influencing the provision of long-acting reversible contraception in California. Obstetrics & Gynecology, 123, 593–602.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Brito, M. B., Ferriani, R. A., Meijers, J. C., Garcia, A. A., Quintana, S. M., Silva de Sà, M. F., & Vieira, C. S. (2012). Effects of the etonogestrel-releasing contraceptive implant inserted immediately postpartum on maternal hemostasis: A randomized controlled trial. Thrombosis Research, 130(3), 355–360.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, D. (2000). The intrauterine device: Still misunderstood after all these years. Southern Medical Journal, 93(9), 859–864.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Deans, E. I., & Grimes, D. A. (2009). Intrauterine devices for adolescents: A systematic review. Contraception, 79, 418–423.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Diaz, V. A., Hughes, N., Dickerson, L. M., Wessell, A. M., & Carek, P. J. (2001). Clinician knowledge about use of intrauterine devices in adolescents in South Carolina AHEC. Family Medicine, 43(6), 407–411.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doyle, J., Stern, L., Hagan, M., Hao, J., & Gricar, J. (2008). Advances in contraception: IUDs from a managed care perspective. Journal of Women’s Health, 17(6), 987–992.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Finer, L. B., Jerman, J., & Kavanaugh, M. L. (2012). Changes in use of long-acting contraceptive methods in the US, 2007–2009. Fertility and Sterility, 98(4), 893–897.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Guttmacher Institute (2012). Facts on unintended pregnancy in the US. In brief: fact sheet. http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs.6.

  • Harper C. C., Stratton L., Raine T. R., Thompson K., Henderson J. T., Blum M., ... Speidel J. J. (2013). Counseling and provision of long-acting reversible contraception in the US: National survey of nurse practitioners. Preventive Medicine, 57, 883–888

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Harper, C. C., Blum, M., De Bocanegra, H. T., Darney, P. D., Speidel, J. J., Policar, M., & Drey, E. A. (2008). Challenges in translating evidence to practice: The provision of intrauterine contraception. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 111(6), 1359–1369.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Harper, C. C., Henderson, J., Raine, T., Goodman, S., Darney, P., Thompson, K., ... Speidel, J. (2012). Evidence-based IUD practice: Family physicians and obstetrician-gynecologists. Family Medicine, 44(9), 637–645.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Harper, C. C., Stratton, L., Raine, T. R., Thompson, K., Henderson, J. T., ... Speidel, J. J. (2013). Counseling and provision of long-acting reversible contraception in the US: National survey of nurse practitioners. Preventive Medicine, 57, 883–888.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Hubacher, D. (2002). The checkered history and bright future of intrauterine contraception in the United States. Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 34(2), 98–103.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Institute of Medicine (2011). Clinical preventive services for women. http://www.iom.edu/Reports/2011/Clinical-Preventive-Services-for-Women-Closing-the-Gaps.aspx.

  • Kane, R., Irving, G., Brown, S., Parkes, N., Walling, M., & Killick, S. (2009). Long-acting, reversible and permanent methods of contraception: Insight into women’s choice of method. Quality in Primary Care, 17, 107–114.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, C., Darney, P., & Thiel de Bocanegra, H. (2013). Intrauterine contraception: Impact of provider training on participant knowledge and provision. Contraception, 88, 226–231.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Luchowski, A. T., Anderson, B. L., Power, M. L., Raglan, G. B., Espey, E., & Schulkin, J. (2014). Obstetrician-gynecologists and contraception: Practice and opinions about the use of IUDs in nulliparous women, adolescents and other patient populations. Contraception, 86, 572–577.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy (2012). Unplanned pregnancy among unmarried young women. Briefly, pp 1–4. Washington, DC: The National Compaign

    Google Scholar 

  • Peipert JF, Madden T, Allsworth J, Secura G (2012). Preventing unintended pregnancies by providing no-cost contraception. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 120, 1291.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Postlethwaite, D., Shaber, R., Mancuso, V., Flores, J., & Armstrong, M. A. (2007). Intrauterine contraception: Evaluation of clinician practice patterns in Kaiser Permanente Northern California. Contraception, 75, 177–184.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Speidel, J. J., Harper, C. C., & Shields, W. C. (2008). The potential of long-acting reversible contraception to decrease unintended pregnancy. Contraception, 78, 197–200.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stanwood, N. L., Garrett, J. M., & Konrad, T. R. (2002). Obstetrician-gynecologists and the intrauterine device: A survey of attitudes and practices. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 99, 275–280.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stoddard, A., McNicholas, C., & Peipert, J. F. (2011). Efficacy and safety of long-acting reversible contraception. Drugs, 71(8), 969–980.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Tocce, K. M., Sheeder, J., & Teal, S. (2012). Rapid repeat pregnancy in adolescents: Do immediate postpartum contraceptive implants make a difference? American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 206, 481–483.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Trussel, J., Lalla, A. M., Doan, Q. V., Reyes, E., Pinto, L., & Gricar, J. (2009). Cost effectiveness of contraceptives in the United States. Contraception, 79(1), 5–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, C. P., Whiteman, M. K., Zapata, L. B., Curtis, K. M., Hillis, S. D., & Marchbanks, P. A. (2012). Health care provider attitudes and practices related to intrauterine devices for nulliparous women. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 119, 762–771.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • United Nations Department of Economic and Social Information and Policy Analysis (2011). World contraceptive use 2011. New York: United Nations Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Venkat, P., Masch, R., Ng, E., Cremer, M., Richman, S., & Arsian, A. (2008). Knowledge and beliefs about contraception in urban Latina women. Journal of Community Health, 22, 357–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The initiatives in Iowa and Colorado, and their evaluations, were funded by an anonymous foundation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Philliber Research & Evaluation, 16 Main St, Accord, NY, 12404, USA

    Ash E. Philliber, Heather Hirsch, Rita Turner & Susan Philliber

  2. Bixby Center for Global Reproductive Health, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA

    Claire D. Brindis

Authors
  1. Ash E. Philliber
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Heather Hirsch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Claire D. Brindis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Rita Turner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Susan Philliber
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ash E. Philliber.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Philliber, A.E., Hirsch, H., Brindis, C.D. et al. The Use of ACOG Guidelines: Perceived Contraindications to IUD and Implant Use Among Family Planning Providers. Matern Child Health J 21, 1706–1712 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10995-017-2320-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10995-017-2320-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation