Chapters
- Background
- IUD Performance
- Insertion
- Removal
- Infection
- Worldwide Use
- IUDs in Family Planning Programs
HIGHLIGHTS
Published by the Population Information Program,
Center for Communication Programs, The Johns Hopkins School of Public Health,
111 Market Place, Suite 310, Baltimore, Maryland 21202-4012, USA
Volume XXIII, Number 5
December 1995 |
Clinical Implications
Research on PID and IUD use reinforces the importance of
good clinical care. I-C. Chi points particularly to three
programmatic measures that minimize the risk of infection (579):
- Careful infection-prevention procedures, including cleaning the cervix
during IUD insertion, and careful checking, at the follow-up visit,
for signs of infection (see Chapter
3, and sidebar, Infection
Prevention for IUD Insertion and Removal);
- Careful screening to assure that women who choose IUDs face
little risk of STDs. Screening involves both asking questions and conducting a pelvic examination. Because PID is
linked to sexually transmitted diseases, the best candidate
for an IUD is a woman living in a stable, mutually faithful
sexual relationship (127, 437, 442). Providers can ask
questions to find out about a woman's patterns of sexual
behavior. During the pelvic exam, the provider can check for
signs of cervical infection. Cervical infection should be
treated, if possible. Once the infection is resolved, the
IUD can be inserted, provided the woman will not face a high
risk of STDs in the future.
- Use long-lasting IUDs and do not remove them unless a woman
requests removal, complications develop, or the IUD reaches
the end of its effectiveness (634). Since much of the
increase in risk of PID is linked to IUD insertion, the
longer-lasting the IUD, the less need for periodic replacement and the less risk of infection over the long term. From
this perspective, a very long-acting IUD, such as the
TCu-380A, is the best IUD for the woman who wants many
years of contraceptive protection.
It is not clear whether administering broad-spectrum
antibiotics just before IUD insertion would reduce pelvic
infection in the first months of use. Several studies have
suggested some protective effect (523, 542), but small size or
methodological problems prevent firm conclusions (579). A large,
randomized trial underway in the US is designed to gather more
conclusive data about the effectiveness of prophylactic
antibiotics (513, 644). In any case, antibiotics should not be
seen as a substitute for good infection-prevention procedures.
IUDs without strings also have been considered. The evidence
is conflicting. Two laboratory studies of IUDs removed from women
reported more bacterial colonization on IUDs with monofilament
strings than on IUDs without strings (350, 434). In addition, two
studies comparing women using IUDs with and without monofilament
strings reported a difference in rates of infection (92, 493), as
did research on inserting the IUD strings into the uterus
together with the device (536). An international clinical trial
of 1,265 women randomly assigned TCu-200 IUDs with and without
strings, however, found no significant difference in the
incidence of PID, STDs, or other infections or inflammation
(538). Other clinical trials also have not found an association
between the presence of strings and the incidence of infection
(38, 68, 114, 210, 428).
Many authorities recommend that, if a woman develops PID
while using an IUD, it should be removed 24 to 48 hours after she
starts taking antibiotics (7, 93, 368, 397, 420, 437, 559). Three
small studies comparing women whose IUDs were removed and those
whose IUDs were left in place after a diagnosis of PID found
little difference in their course of recovery, however (346, 525,
554). In fact, women whose IUDs were removed had longer hospital
stays than women whose IUDs were left in place in two of the
studies (525, 554). A WHO scientific group recently advised that
the IUD might be allowed to remain in place if the woman no
longer faces a high risk of STD infection and she understands the
risks of repeated PID (565). |