Use of intrauterine contraceptive devices in nulliparous women: personal experience over a 12-year period.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the use of intrauterine contraceptive devices (IUDs) in nulliparous women compared to their use in parous women.


METHODS
A comparative cross-sectional study was carried out to determine the reasons for removal of IUDs inserted between 1985 and 1996 in a sample of 227 nulliparous women and 2080 parous women. The statistical analysis was performed using the chi 2 test; the differences were considered to be significant when p < 0.05.


RESULTS
The reasons for removal of IUDs in the two groups were: expiry, 49.1% in the nulliparous group vs. 48.2% in the parous group; planned pregnancy, 21.7% vs. 15.4%; accidental pregnancy, 4.8% vs. 6.3%; expulsion, 1.6% vs. 5.1%; pelvic inflammatory disease, 1.6% vs. 1.1%; pain and/or bleeding, 14.5% vs. 10.2%; other, 6.4% vs. 6.3%; vasectomy or tubal sterilization, 0% vs. 7%.


CONCLUSIONS
Our data suggest that nulliparity is not a contraindication for the use of an IUD, and that the use of an IUD in nulliparous women is as safe and effective as in parous women.
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Hospital Txagorritxu, Vitoria, Spain.
I
I
Lete
P
P
Morales
J L
JL
de Pablo
D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000075202:Contraindications; D003430:Cross-Sectional Studies; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007434:Intrauterine Devices / Q000009:adverse effects; D008875:Middle Aged; D010146:Pain / Q000209:etiology; D010298:Parity; D000292:Pelvic Inflammatory Disease / Q000209:etiology; D011247:Pregnancy / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D013997:Time Factors; D014592:Uterine Hemorrhage / Q000209:etiology