Keywords
Puerperium
Copper Intrauterine Device
How to Cite
Copyright © | All rights reserved.
The journal holds the exclusive copyright for the publication of this article under the terms of Brazilian law 9610/98.
Partial reproduction
The use of parts of the texts, figures and questionnaire of the article is free, being mandatory the citation of the authors and journal.
Total reproduction
It is expressly prohibited and must be authorized by the journal.
Abstract
Objective: To compare the perception of women about the IUD, before and after the puerperal consultation, at high-risk public maternity hospital, where the device is inserted Methods: This is a cross-sectional study, conducted with 348 women and constitutes the analysis of questionnaires that are applied before and after puerperal consultation, those who wish to insert the intrauterine device offered in the unit. Data are stratified and compared by age and education level. The data obtained were analyzed using descriptive statistics. The study was approved by the research ethics committee. Results: The sample, with a mean age of 27 years, had a majority with high school education (64.4%). Of these, pre-insertion 23.9% believed they would feel constrained and 43.8% attributed very intense pain to the procedure. Finally, the numbers dropped to just 9.7% and 14.1% respectively. Conclusion: It is concluded that the fear of the procedure directly influences the patient's expectation, causing her to attribute a much higher degree of pain than the actual one related to it. Regardless of age and education level, this hypothesis was confirmed
References
ALTSHULER A, et al. The WHO’s medical eligibility criteria for contraceptive use: 20 years of global guidance. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2015; 27(6): 451–459.
AMERICAN COLLEGE OF OBSTETRICIANS AND GYNECOLOGISTS (ACOG). Practice Bulletin Number 186: Long-active reversible contraception: implants and intrauterine devices. Obstet Gynecol. 2017; 130(5): e251-e269.
BAHAMONDES L, et al. The use of long-acting reversible contraceptives in Latin America and the Caribbean: current landscape and recommendations. Hum Reprod Open 2018; 1: 030.
BAHAMONDES L, et al. Long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARCs) methods. Best Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology. 2020; 66: 28-40.
BALDWIN MK, et al. Intrauterine device placement at 3 versus 6 weeks postpartum: a randomized trial. Contraception, 2016; 93(4): 356–363.
BARRETO DS, et al. Dispositivo Intrauterino na Atenção Primária a Saúde: uma revisão integrativa. Revista Brasileira de Medicina de Família e Comunidade, 2021; 16: 43.
BARON M, et al. A Review of Long-Acting Reversible Contraception Methods and Barriers to Their Use, 2018; 117(4): 156-159.
BOCANEGRA HTD, et al. Interpregnancy intervals: impact of postpartum contraceptive effectiveness and coverage. Am J Obstet Gynecol., 2014; 210(4): 311.e1-3118.
BRANDÃO ER, et al. Métodos contraceptivos reversíveis de longa duração no Sistema Único de Saúde: o debate sobre a (in)disciplina da mulher. Cien Saude Colet., 2019; 24(3): 875-879.
BRASIL. Portaria nº 3.265, de 1º de dezembro de 2017. 2017. Disponível em: http ://bvsms.saude.gov.br. Acessado em: 22 de agosto de 2023.
DE LEON RGP, et al. Contraceptive use in Latin America and the Caribbean with a focus on long-acting reversible contraceptives: prevalence and inequalities in 23 countries. Lancet Glob Health, 2019; 7(2): e227-e235.
FEDERAÇÃO BRASILEIRA DE GINECOLOGIA E OBSTETRÍCIA (FEBRASGO). Manual de anticoncepção. Femina, 2015; 37(9): 459-92.
GONÇALVES MR, et al. Estudo comparativo entre dispositivos intrauterinos inseridos em mulheres no puerpério sob diferentes técnicas e períodos. Arquivos Médicos dos Hospitais e da Faculdade de Ciências Médicas da Santa Casa de São Paulo, 2019; 64(3): 213-220.
KUMAR S, et al. Women’s experience with postpartum intrauterine contraceptive device use in India. Reproductive Health, 2014; 11: 32.
LESTER F, et al. Intracesarean insertion of the Copper T380A versus 6 weeks postcesarean: a randomized clinical trial. Contraception, 2015; 91(3): 198–203.
MELLI TL. Atenção em contracepção no puerpério: o DIU está sendo ofertado às mulheres usuárias de unidades básicas de saúde? Dissertação (Mestrado em Cuidado em Atenção Primária em Saúde) - Escola de Enfermagem. Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, 2019.
PHILLIPS J, et al. Barriers to implementation of long-acting reversible contraception: A systematic review. Journal of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners, 2018; 30(4): 236-243.
SODJE JDK, et al. Feasibility, acceptability, and uptake of postpartum intrauterine contraceptive devices in southern Nigeria. International Journal Of Gynaecology And Obstetrics: The Official Organ Of The International Federation Of Gynaecology And Obstetrics, 2016; 135(2): 149–153.
TRINDADE RED, et al. Uso de contracepção e desigualdades do planejamento reprodutivo das mulheres brasileiras. Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, 2021; 26: 3493-3504.
VIEIRA CS, et al. Postpartum contraception. Revista Brasileira De Ginecologia E Obstetricia: Revista Da Federacao Brasileira Das Sociedades De Ginecologia E Obstetricia, 2008; 30(9): 470–479.
WESTON MRS, et al. Factors influencing uptake of intrauterine devices among postpartum adolescents: a qualitative study. American Journal Of Obstetrics And Gynecology, 2012; 206(1): 40.e1-7.
WHITAKER AK e CHEN BA. Society of family planning guidelines: postplacental insertion of intrauterine devices. Contraception, 2018; 97: 2e13.