Advertisement

Advances in Contraception

, Volume 1, Issue 2, pp 161–165 | Cite as

Postabortion insertion of the Nova T and ML Cu250: preliminary results of a comparative study

  • T. McCarthy
  • L. Ramachandran
  • H. S. Huang
  • S. Ratnam
Article

Abstract

This 4-year prospective randomized study is designed to compare the effectiveness and complication rates of the Nova T and MLCu250 inserted immediately postabortion. At the cut-off date (30 November 1983), all patients in the first cohort of 400 women had completed at least 12 months of use. At this stage of the trial, no significant differences had emerged between the two devices in any of the standard termination categories.

Keywords

Public Health Complication Rate Termination Category Standard Termination 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Resumé

Cette étude prospective randomisée de 4 ans est destinée à comparer l'efficacité et les taux de complication du Nova T et du MLCu250 insérés aussitôt après un avortement. A la date de l'interruption (30/11/83), tous les malades du premier groupe de 400 femmes avaient au moins 12 mois d'utilisation. A ce stade de l'essai, aucune différence significative n'est apparue entre les deux dispositifs dans aucune des catégories d'interruption habituelles.

Resumen

Este estudio prospectivo randomizado, de 4 años, se ha creado para comparar las tasas de efectividad y complicaciones de los dispositivos Nova T y MLCu250 insertados inmediatamente después de un aborto. En la fecha de cierre del estudio (noviembre 30 de 1983), todas las pacientes en la primera cohorte de 400 mujeres, habían completado al menos 12 meses de uso. En el momento de este análisis no se encontró una diferencia significativa entre los dos dispositivos para cualquiera de las categorías de terminaciones típicas.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    IUDs: An appropriate contraceptive for many women. (1982).Population Reports,10, B105–110Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    McCarthyT., LimL. S., ChewS. C., LimS. M., ChengM. C. E., LeeS. C., YongY. M. and RatnamS. S. (1983). Comparative studies of IUDs in Singapore.Contracept. Deliv. Syst.,4, 219–225PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    AzenS. R., RoyS., PiheM. C., CasagrandeJ. and MishellD. R. (1971). A new procedure for the statistical evaluation of intrauterine contraception.Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol.,128, 329–335Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    WHO Task Force on Intrauterine Devices for Fertility Regulation (1983). IUD insertion following termination of pregnancy: A clinical trial of the TCu220C, Lippes Loop D and Copper 7.Stud. Fam. Plann.,14, 99–107Google Scholar

Copyright information

© MTP Press Ltd. 1985

Authors and Affiliations

  • T. McCarthy
    • 1
  • L. Ramachandran
    • 1
  • H. S. Huang
    • 1
  • S. Ratnam
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, National University of SingaporeKandang Kerbau HospitalSingapore

Personalised recommendations