View clinical trials related to Contraception.
Filter by:Family Planning Ahead is a study that aims to improve decision-making about postpartum contraception. Family Planning Ahead will test two different strategies: a patient decision aid and a patient information leaflet.
Determine what kind of side effects women experience in the first year after they start using an intrauterine device.
The aim of this non-interventional study (NIS) is to assess, under real-life conditions, woman's satisfaction with Levonogestrel IntraUterine System (LNG-IUS) in a young (18-30 years old (y.o.)) Spanish population taking into account their parity status. Furthermore, the study is aimed to evaluate the impact of: menstrual bleeding pattern and satisfaction with it at baseline, LNG-IUS chosen, previously used contraceptive method and reasons for change to/ choice of a LNG-IUS on overall satisfaction with LNG-IUS use.
Insertion of Intrauterine Contraceptive Device during Cesarean Section: Randomized Clinical Trial
This is a Phase I single-center, two-arm, open-label, randomized study in healthy HIV-negative women to evaluate the pharmacokinetics, safety, and bleeding patterns associated with 90-day use of matrix vaginal rings containing 200 mg Dapivirine and 320 mg Levonorgestrel.
Intrauterine devices (IUDs) are historically placed at a six-week postpartum visit for women who desire intrauterine contraception after delivery. A two-week postpartum visit could be a convenient time for women to receive contraception, including IUDs. Offering women IUDs at two-weeks postpartum may decrease the risk of undesired pregnancy and rapid repeat pregnancy. This study will compare IUD insertion at two different times after delivery: two-weeks and six-weeks postpartum. This will allow researchers to assess whether the timing of IUD placement affects whether an IUD is expelled, or pushed out of it's ideal location.
This clinical trial evaluated the comparative bioavailability of two injectable suspension formulations of medroxyprogesterone acetate + estradiol cypionate, a test (Depomês®, 25 mg/mL medroxyprogesterone acetate + 5 mg/mL estradiol cypionate, Biolab Sanus Farmacêutica Ltda.) and a reference formulation (Cyclofemina®, 25 mg/0.5 mL medroxyprogesterone acetate + 5 mg/0.5 mL estradiol cypionate, Millet Roux Ltda.) in healthy female volunteers after a single intramuscular dose administration. In addition, this study also evaluated the safety and tolerability of these drugs.
More than 345,000 U.S. women undergo either tubal ligation ("getting her tubes tied") or Essure procedures each year to permanently avoid pregnancy. Both prevent pregnancy by blocking women's Fallopian tubes but neither are 100% effective. Both can have complications, but not enough is known to help women make an informed choice between the two. Essure is popular because it can be performed without anesthesia in a doctor's office and women can return to work the next day. However, patients have reported that the Essure procedure was unexpectedly painful. Also, women need to use other contraceptives for 3 months and then return for testing, to make sure their tubes are blocked and will prevent pregnancy. Not all women return for this test and some may get pregnant before realizing their Essure didn't work. Essure was approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2002, but no studies ever compared it to tubal ligation. By 2015, over 9,000 women reported serious complications to the FDA. Women who were unhappy with Essure found each other online and created a Facebook "Essure Problems" support group that now has over 31,000 members. After an FDA Advisory Board expressed concerns about Essure's risks, in 2016 the FDA required stronger warnings about complications and announced that "more rigorous research" was needed, demanding Essure's maker conduct a new study comparing the benefits and risks of Essure to tubal ligation. Unfortunately, that study will not be finished before September 2023. To provide answers as rapidly as possible for women considering sterilization, we will analyze data from the medical records of thousands of women with sterilization procedures funded by California's Medicaid. As poor women and women of color have different experiences with healthcare, and they more often choose sterilization, comparing these women's experiences with Essure and tubal ligation is very important. We will compare the safety and effectiveness of the 2 sterilization procedures to answer: - How many women got pregnant afterwards? - How many operations did each woman need to become infertile? - Which complications did women have (i.e. chronic pain, depression)? We will also check whether certain women (such as certain age groups or those with diabetes) were most likely to have problems after either procedure.
Prospective, multi-center, international, non-randomized, two-arm study of subjects undergoing either FemBloc or laparoscopic bilateral tubal sterilization (Control). The FemBloc group total study duration will be approximately 65 months. The laparoscopic tubal sterilization (Control) group total study duration will be approximately 62 months.
This is a mixed methods process evaluation of a programmatic intervention to integrate family planning and immunization services at health facilities and through outreach services in Dowa and Ntchisi districts of Malawi. The study involved qualitative methods (in depth interviews and focus group discussions with service providers, mothers and fathers of infants <1 year, and supervisors and program managers) as well as secondary analysis of service statistics for family planning and immunization services and of supervision reports.