Objectives:To compare the safety of different ICDs that are commonly used in primary family-planning service centers.Methods:1200 women using ICDs were randomly selected and were divided into four groups according to the type of ICD they've used,each group including 300 cases.The immediate and long-term complications and adverse reactions of these four types of ICD were analyzed,and their safety was discussed.Results:Women with ICD in these four groups do not have significant difference in terms of waist sour,abdominal and pelvic infection,ring shifting after one month.However,adverse effects including hemorrhage,ring shift,pain,etc.are evidently different,and group A tops these four groups in terms of bleeding rate,rate of ring deviation,ring shifting and pain with significant difference (P ＜ 0.05).Conclusion:ICDs are widely applied in medical practice at primary level in China while most women know little about it.Hence gynecologists should take different factors into consideration to give practical and safe advice for women to increase the contraceptive effect and application safety.%目的:对比分析基层计生站常用节育器放置后的安全性.方法:选取某基层地区上环妇女1200例作为研究对象,分别按照所上环的种类分为四组,每组300例.分别为惰性宫内节育器组(A组)、带铜宫内节育器组(B组)、释放孕激素的宫内节育器组(C组)、释放止血药物的宫内节育器组(D组).对四种节育器放置后的近期和远期并发症、不良反应进行对比分析,探讨基层地区节育器使用的安全状况.结果:四组妇女上环1个月内出现腰酸、腹坠、盆腔感染、移位率无显著性差异,但发生出血的副作用、脱环率、疼痛、取环率却存在较为明显的差异,以A组出血率、取环率、脱环率及疼痛率最高,和其它三组比较,差异具有显著性(P值均＜0.05).上环1个月-1年内,四组受试者的带环怀孕率、脱环率、取环率、月经异常率、性交痛率比较,以A组最高,D组最低,B组和C组居中,A组和其它三组比较,差异具有显著性(P值均＜0.05),B组和C组之间无明显差异.结论:节育环临床应用广泛,上环妇女大多对节育环相关知识了解较少,因此,在节育环的选择上,医生应综合妇女的实际身体情况,选择各自适合的节育环,提高避孕效果及使用的安全性.
展开▼
