‘The horror stories put me off!’: exploring women’s acceptability of the Levonorgestrel IntraUterine System (LNG-IUS) for endometrial protection
Claire Henry
1 4 , Alec Ekeroma 2 , Anthony Dowell 3 , Sara Filoche 1
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations
1 Department of Obstetrics, Gynaecology and Women’s Health, University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand
2 School of Medicine, National University of Samoa, Apia, Samoa
3 Department of Primary Health Care, University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand
4 Corresponding author. Email: Claire.henry@otago.ac.nz
Journal of Primary Health Care 13(1) 55-62 https://doi.org/10.1071/HC20105
Published: 15 March 2021
Journal Compilation © Royal New Zealand College of General Practitioners 2021 This is an open access article licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: There are few studies of user perceptions of the Levonorgestrel Intrauterine System (LNG-IUS; Mirena™), which now has the potential to play an important role in the treatment of women with hyperplasia or early stage endometrial cancer. There is limited evidence on how well the Mirena™ is perceived and accepted by women in this context.
AIM: To gain an understanding of New Zealand women’s views on the use of the Mirena™ contraceptive device to inform policies in endometrial cancer prevention.
METHODS: An online survey platform (Qualtrics™) was disseminated over social media sites such as Facebook once a week for 3 weeks. The survey used mixed methods (closed questions, multiple choice and open-ended questions) and covered topics relating to the knowledge and use of the Mirena™ for endometrial protection. Data were collected and explored using content and thematic analysis.
RESULTS: In total, 89 women responded to the survey. Half (42/89) of respondents had never used a Mirena™ in their life. Most women (79/89) did not know anyone who had had endometrial cancer. The frequency of negative comments about the Mirena™ was higher than positive comments (42 and 26 respectively), largely attributed to personal or reported poor experiences with other contraceptives (including the copper intrauterine device).
DISCUSSION: Although health-care providers may view the Mirena™ favourably, this view was not reciprocated in this community sample.
KEYwords: Intrauterine device; endometrial cancer; survey; acceptability; womens health; qualitative
References
[1] Scott OW, Tin Tin S, Bigby SM, et al. Rapid increase in endometrial cancer incidence and ethnic differences in New Zealand. Cancer Causes Control. 2019; 30 121–7.| Rapid increase in endometrial cancer incidence and ethnic differences in New Zealand.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 30671687PubMed |
[2] Soeberg M, Blakely T, Sarfati D. Trends in ethnic and socioeconomic inequalities in cancer survival, New Zealand, 1991–2004. Cancer Epidemiol. 2015; 39 860–2.
| Trends in ethnic and socioeconomic inequalities in cancer survival, New Zealand, 1991–2004.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 26651447PubMed |
[3] Firestone RT, Ellison-Loschmann L, Shelling AN, et al. Ethnic differences in disease presentation of uterine cancer in New Zealand women. J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care. 2012; 38 239–45.
| Ethnic differences in disease presentation of uterine cancer in New Zealand women.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 22241766PubMed |
[4] Staples JN, Rauh L, Peach MS, et al. Endometrial cancer in an increasingly obese population: exploring alternative options when surgery may not cut it. Gynecol Oncol Rep. 2018; 25 30–4.
| Endometrial cancer in an increasingly obese population: exploring alternative options when surgery may not cut it.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 29977988PubMed |
[5] Pronin SM, Novikova OV, Andreeva JY, et al. Fertility-sparing treatment of early endometrial cancer and complex atypical hyperplasia in young women of childbearing potential. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2015; 25 1010–4.
| Fertility-sparing treatment of early endometrial cancer and complex atypical hyperplasia in young women of childbearing potential.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 25950126PubMed |
[6] Pal N, Broaddus RR, Urbauer DL, et al. Treatment of low-risk endometrial cancer and complex atypical hyperplasia with the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device. Obstet Gynecol. 2018; 131 109–16.
| Treatment of low-risk endometrial cancer and complex atypical hyperplasia with the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 29215513PubMed |
[7] Gallos ID, Krishan P, Shehmar M, et al. LNG-IUS versus oral progestogen treatment for endometrial hyperplasia: a long-term comparative cohort study. Hum Reprod. 2013; 28 2966–71.
| LNG-IUS versus oral progestogen treatment for endometrial hyperplasia: a long-term comparative cohort study.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 23975691PubMed |
[8] Gallos ID, Yap J, Rajkhowa M, et al. Regression, relapse, and live birth rates with fertility-sparing therapy for endometrial cancer and atypical complex endometrial hyperplasia: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012; 207 266.e1–266.e12.
| Regression, relapse, and live birth rates with fertility-sparing therapy for endometrial cancer and atypical complex endometrial hyperplasia: a systematic review and metaanalysis.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[9] Soini T, Hurskainen R, Grénman S, et al. Cancer risk in women using the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system in Finland. Obstet Gynecol. 2014; 124 292–9.
| Cancer risk in women using the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system in Finland.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 25004338PubMed |
[10] Kavanaugh ML, Frohwirth L, Jerman J, et al. Long-acting reversible contraception for adolescents and young adults: patient and provider perspectives. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2013; 26 86–95.
| Long-acting reversible contraception for adolescents and young adults: patient and provider perspectives.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 23287602PubMed |
[11] Spies EL, Askelson NM, Gelman E, et al. Young women’s knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors related to long-acting reversible contraceptives. Women’s Health Issues. 2010; 20 394–9.
| Young women’s knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors related to long-acting reversible contraceptives.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 21050998PubMed |
[12] Higgins JA, Kramer RD, Ryder KM. Provider bias in long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) promotion and removal: perceptions of young adult women. Am J Public Health. 2016; 106 1932–7.
| Provider bias in long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) promotion and removal: perceptions of young adult women.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 27631741PubMed |
[13] Lete I, Obispo C, Izaguirre F, et al. The levonorgestrel intrauterine system (Mirena) for treatment of idiopathic menorrhagia. Assessment of quality of life and satisfaction. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2008; 13 231–7.
| The levonorgestrel intrauterine system (Mirena) for treatment of idiopathic menorrhagia. Assessment of quality of life and satisfaction.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 18609346PubMed |
[14] Hubacher D, Chen P-L, Park S. Side effects from the copper IUD: do they decrease over time? Contraception. 2009; 79 356–62.
| Side effects from the copper IUD: do they decrease over time?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 19341847PubMed |
[15] Robakis T, Williams KE, Nutkiewicz L, et al. Hormonal contraceptives and mood: review of the literature and implications for future research. Curr Psychiatry Rep. 2019; 21 57
| Hormonal contraceptives and mood: review of the literature and implications for future research.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 31172309PubMed |
[16] Toffol E, Heikinheimo O, Koponen P, et al. Hormonal contraception and mental health: results of a population-based study. Hum Reprod. 2011; 26 3085–93.
| Hormonal contraception and mental health: results of a population-based study.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 21840911PubMed |
[17] Toffol E, Heikinheimo O, Koponen P, et al. Further evidence for lack of negative associations between hormonal contraception and mental health. Contraception. 2012; 86 470–80.
| Further evidence for lack of negative associations between hormonal contraception and mental health.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 22465115PubMed |
[18] Nygaard Andersen M, Bech P, Csillag C. Development and remission of depressive symptoms and treatment with hormonal contraceptives. Oxf Med Case Reports. 2014; 2014 63–4.
| Development and remission of depressive symptoms and treatment with hormonal contraceptives.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 25988030PubMed |
[19] de Wit AE, Booij SH, Giltay EJ, et al. Association of use of oral contraceptives with depressive symptoms among adolescents and young women. JAMA Psychiatr. 2020; 77 52–9.
| Association of use of oral contraceptives with depressive symptoms among adolescents and young women.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[20] Faculty of Sexual & Reproductive Healthcare Clinical Effectiveness Unit. Combined Hormonal Contraception Guideline. January 2019. London: Royal College of the Obstetricians and Gynaecologists; 2019.
[21] Kavanaugh ML, Jerman J, Hubacher D, et al. Characteristics of women in the United States who use long-acting reversible contraceptive methods. Obstet Gynecol. 2011; 117 1349–57.
| Characteristics of women in the United States who use long-acting reversible contraceptive methods.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 21606745PubMed |
[22] ACOG Committee Opinion no. 450: Increasing use of contraceptive implants and intrauterine devices to reduce unintended pregnancy Obstet Gynecol. 2009; 114 1434–38.
| 20134301PubMed |
[23] Lete I, del Carme Cuesta M, Marín J, et al. Acceptability of the levonorgestrel intrauterine system in the long-term treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding: how many women choose to use a second device? Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2011; 154 67–70.
| Acceptability of the levonorgestrel intrauterine system in the long-term treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding: how many women choose to use a second device?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 20728261PubMed |
[24] Baldaszti E, Wimmer-Puchinger B, Löschke K. Acceptability of the long-term contraceptive levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (Mirena®): a 3-year follow-up study. Contraception. 2003; 67 87–91.
| Acceptability of the long-term contraceptive levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (Mirena®): a 3-year follow-up study.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 12586318PubMed |
[25] Diaz J, Bahamondes L, Monteiro I, et al. Acceptability and performance of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (Mirena®) in Campinas, Brazil. Contraception. 2000; 62 59–61.
| Acceptability and performance of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (Mirena®) in Campinas, Brazil.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 11102588PubMed |
[26] Moreau C, Cleland K, Trussell J. Contraceptive discontinuation attributed to method dissatisfaction in the United States. Contraception. 2007; 76 267–72.
| Contraceptive discontinuation attributed to method dissatisfaction in the United States.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 17900435PubMed |
[27] Robinson R, China S, Bunkheila A, et al. Mirena® intrauterine system in the treatment of menstrual disorders: a survey of UK patients’ experience, acceptability and satisfaction. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2008; 28 728–31.
| Mirena® intrauterine system in the treatment of menstrual disorders: a survey of UK patients’ experience, acceptability and satisfaction.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 19065370PubMed |
[28] Wildemeersch D. Why perimenopausal women should consider to use a levonorgestrel intrauterine system. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2016; 32 659–61.
| Why perimenopausal women should consider to use a levonorgestrel intrauterine system.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 26930021PubMed |
[29] Admon L, Haefner JK, Kolenic GE, et al. Recruiting pregnant patients for survey research: a head to head comparison of social media-based versus clinic-based approaches. J Med Internet Res. 2016; 18 e326
| Recruiting pregnant patients for survey research: a head to head comparison of social media-based versus clinic-based approaches.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 28003174PubMed |
[30] Goldstuck ND. Modern menstruation: is it abnormal and unhealthy? Med Hypotheses. 2020; 144 109955
| Modern menstruation: is it abnormal and unhealthy?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 32526510PubMed |
