Determinants and perception of postpartum intrauterine contraceptive device services in Maharashtra, India

Jayashree Sachin Gothankar, Prakash Doke, Prasad Pore, Arvinder Pal Singh Narula, Sudhanshu Mahajan, Rupesh Kumar Deshmukh

Abstract


Undesired and unintended pregnancies increase unwanted births or induced abortions, consequently increasing maternal morbidity and mortality. Postpartum insertion of the Intra Uterine Contraceptive Device (PPIUCD) is an effective method for population control. The authors conducted the study to assess the determinants of PPIUCD services by identifying beneficiaries and healthcare workers' perceptions. We conducted this study in Maharashtra State, India having five geographical divisions and 36 districts. The authors visited 10 Primary Health Centers and three Community Health Centers from five districts, randomly selecting one from each division. We interviewed 45 women who had undergone insertion one day to one year prior and 17 health care workers. About one-third of women received counseling during pregnancy. The medical officers obtained the consents mostly during delivery. They inserted about 85% of devices within one hour of delivery. About 38% of women had at least one complication. Lower abdominal pain (22.22%), irregular bleeding (20.00%), the expulsion of CuT (13.33%), pain during periods (13.33%) were common. The removal rate was 6.67%. The complication rates observed in the present study are comparable to the hospital studies. Thus, the study reassures that the services in small institutions are very safe, and governments can fearlessly implement the program.Keywords: ComplicationsCounselingExpulsionHealth center Quality Removal 

References


REFERENCES

R. Hooda, S. Mann, S. Nanda, A. Gupta, H. More, and J. Bhutani, “Immediate Postpartum Intrauterine Contraceptive Device Insertions in Caesarean and Vaginal Deliveries : A Comparative Study of Follow-Up Outcomes,” Int. J. Reprod. Med., vol. 2016, 2016.

N. Kapp and K. M. Curtis, “Intrauterine device insertion during the postpartum period: a systematic review,” Contraception, vol. 80, no. 4, pp. 327–336, 2009, doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2009.03.024.

S. Rezai, “Postpartum intrauterine device contraception: A review,” World J. Obstet. Gynecol., vol. 5, no. 1, p. 134, 2016, doi: 10.5317/wjog.v5.i1.134.

A. Gonie, C. Worku, T. Assefa, D. Bogale, and A. Girma, “Acceptability and factors associated with post-partum IUCD use among women who gave birth at bale zone health facilities, Southeast-Ethiopia,” Contracept. Reprod. Med., vol. 3, no. 1, Dec. 2018, doi: 10.1186/s40834-018-0071-z.

V. Yadav et al., “Comparison of outcomes at 6 weeks following postpartum intrauterine contraceptive device insertions by doctors and nurses in India :,” Contraception, vol. 93, no. 4, pp. 347–355, 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2015.12.012.

M. Government of India, “Rural Health Statistics 2019-20,” pp. 1–153, 2020.

S. Mishra, “Evaluation of Safety, Efficacy, and Expulsion of Post-Placental and Intra-Cesarean Insertion of Intrauterine Contraceptive Devices (PPIUCD),” J. Obstet. Gynecol. India, vol. 64, no. 5, pp. 337–343, 2014, doi: 10.1007/s13224-014-0550-3.

S. A. Mohamed, M. A. Kamel, O. M. Shaaban, and H. T. Salem, “Acceptability for the use of postpartum intrauterine contraceptive devices: Assiut experience,” Med. Princ. Pract., vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 170–175, 2003, doi: 10.1159/000070754.

M. K. Harani, N. C. Sarkar, M. M. Saha, M. Paul, and A. Debnath, “A Prospective Study on PPIUCD Insertion between Vaginal Delivery and Caesarean Section,” J. Cinical Diagnostic Res., vol. 13, no. 7, pp. 12–14, 2019, doi: 10.7860/JCDR/2019/41321.13013.

H. Divakar, A. Bhardwaj, C. Narhari, P. Thelma, and S. Pooja, “Critical Factors Influencing the Acceptability of Post ‑ placental Insertion of Intrauterine Contraceptive Device : A Study in Six Public / Private Institutes in India,” J. Obstet. Gynecol. India, vol. 69, no. 4, pp. 344–349, 2019, doi: 10.1007/s13224-019-01221-7.

V. Abinaya, G. Dorairajan, and P. Chinnakali, “Post partum Intrauterine Contraceptive Device: Knowledge and Factors Affection Acceptance among Pregnanct/parturient Women Attendig a Large Tertiary Health Center in Puducherry, India,” Int. J. Adv. Medi Heath Res, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 69–74, 2017, doi: 10.4103/IJAMR.IJAMR.

K. Rani, N. K. Pangtey, G. Khanna, and M. Rani, “Postpartum intrauterine contraceptive device ( PPIUCD ) insertion : practices and aftermath at tertiary care centre,” Int. J. Reprod. Contraception, Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod., vol. 7, no. 11, pp. 4742–4746, 2018.

M. Rana, S. K. Atri, V. Chib, and N. Kumari, “Postpartum intrauterine contraception device , a method of contraception : A study from rural north India,” Int. J. Clin. Obstet. Gynaenology, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 169–173, 2019.

S. Kant, S. Archana, A. Singh, F. Ahamed, and P. Haldar, “Acceptance rate, probability of follow-up, and expulsion of postpartum intrauterine contraceptive device offered at two primary health centers, North India,” J. Fam. Med. Prim. Care, vol. 5, no. 4, p. 770, 2016, doi: 10.4103/2249-4863.201173.

S. Deshpande, S. Gadappa, K. Yelikar, N. Wanjare, and S. Andurkar, “Awareness , acceptability and clinical outcome of post-placental insertion of intrauterine contraceptive device in Marathwada region , India,” Indian J. Obstet. Gyncology Res., vol. 4, no. 2015, pp. 77–82, 2017, doi: 10.18231/2394-2754.2017.0016.

S. S. Bhat, H. Damle, S. P. Darawade, K. Junnare, and M. Ashturkar, “To study the acceptance of postpartum intrauterine contraceptive device, CU T 380 A, in a tertiary care hospital in India,” J. Reprod. Heal. Med., vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 93–98, 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.jrhm.2016.05.002.

R. A. M. Ali, “Acceptability and Safety of Postpartum Intrauterine Contraceptive Device among Parturients at Muhimbili National Hospital, Tanzania,” 2012.

B. Tomar, V. Saini, and M. Gupta, “Post-partum intrauterine contraceptive device : acceptability and safety,” Int. J. Reprod. Contraception, Obstet. Gynecol., vol. 7, no. 5, pp. 2011–2017, 2018.

S. Kumar et al., “Women ’ s experience with postpartum intrauterine contraceptive device use in India,” Reprod. Health, pp. 1–6, 2014.

M. Poovathi and P. Sondararajan, “Immediate postpartum intrauterine contraceptive device insertion: a prospective follow up study,” Int. J. Reprod. Contraception, Obstet. Gynecol., vol. 5, no. 6, pp. 1902–1905, 2016, doi: 10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20161687.

S. P. D. B. Saxena, “Postpartum IUCD: 2 years Experience at a Tertiary Care Hospital,” J. Med. Sci. Clin. Res., vol. 6, no. 9, Sep. 2018, doi: 10.18535/jmscr/v6i9.31.

A. Sharma and V. Gupta, “A study of awareness and factors affecting acceptance of PPIUCD in,” Int. J. Community Med. Public Heal., vol. 4, no. 8, pp. 2706–2710, 2017.

A. T. Alukal, R. C. Raveendran, and L. George, “Original Research Article PPIUCD : awareness and reasons for non-acceptance,” Int. J. Reprod. Contraception, Obstet. Gynecol., vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 582–586, 2018.

R. Aseri, “Postpartum Intrauterine Contraceptive Device – A Follow up Study of Clinical Outcomes,” J. Med. Sci. Clin. Res., vol. 7, no. 12, pp. 96–100, 2019, doi: 10.18535/jmscr/v7i12.20.

P. M. Iftikhar, N. Shaheen, and E. Arora, “Efficacy and Satisfaction Rate in Postpartum Intrauterine Contraceptive Device Insertion: A Prospective Study,” Cureus, vol. 11, no. 9, 2019, doi: 10.7759/cureus.5646.

F. J. Rwegoshora, P. S. Muganyizi, G. F. Kimario, P. P. Paul, and A. Makins, “A one-year cohort study of complications, continuation, and failure rates of postpartum TCu380A in Tanzania,” Reprod. Health, vol. 17, no. 1, Oct. 2020, doi: 10.1186/s12978-020-00999-4.

D. L. W. Dasanayake, M. Patabendige, and Y. Amarasinghe, “Single center experience on implementation of the postpartum intrauterine device (PPIUD) in Sri Lanka: A retrospective study,” BMC Res. Notes, vol. 13, no. 1, Apr. 2020, doi: 10.1186/s13104-020-05045-x.

N. Garg, S. Grover, and B. Kaur, “Postpartum IUCD: its acceptance and complications,” Int. J. Reprod. Contraception, Obstet. Gynecol., vol. 6, no. 7, p. 2973, 2017, doi: 10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20172919.

D. Vithalani, D. Shah, and D. Patel, “Study of Follow Up and Outcome in Patients With Postpartum Iucd Insertion for Birth Control,” Natl. J. Community Med., vol. 11, no. 0, p. 1, 2020, doi: 10.5455/njcm.20190913063442.

S. Sonalkar and N. Kapp, “Intrauterine device insertion in the postpartum period: A systematic review,” Eur. J. Contracept. Reprod. Heal. Care, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 4–18, 2015, doi: 10.3109/13625187.2014.971454.

Y. Abebaw et al., “Providers’ knowledge on postpartum intrauterine contraceptive device (PPIUCD) service provision in Amhara region public health facility, Ethiopia,” PLoS One, vol. 14, no. 4, p. e0214334, Apr. 2019, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0214334.




DOI: http://doi.org/10.11591/ijphs.v11i4.21281

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


International Journal of Public Health Science (IJPHS)
p-ISSN: 2252-8806, e-ISSN: 2620-4126

View IJPHS Stats

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.