Perimenopause pp 281-286 | Cite as

Contraceptive Needs and Options in Perimenopausal Women

  • Patricia J. Sulak
Part of the Serono Symposia USA book series (SERONOSYMP)


How we approach contraception in today’s perimenopausal woman is drastically different from the approach of even 10 years ago, because the needs and options for this age group have changed.


Pelvic Inflammatory Disease Oral Contraceptive Pill Tubal Ligation Intrauterine Device Perimenopausal Woman 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Advance report of final natality statistics, 1991. Monthly Vital Statistics Report 1993;42(3).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ventura SJ, Martin JA, Taffel SM, Mathews TJ, Clarke CS. Advance report of final natality statistics, 1992. Monthly Vital Statistics Report 1994;43(5):1–88.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    1994 Ortho Annual Birth Control Study. Ortho Pharmaceutical Corporation, Raritan, NJ.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mischell DR Jr. Noncontraceptive benefits of oral contraceptives. J Reprod Med 1993;38(suppl):1021.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    The Cancer and Steroid Hormone Study of the Centers for Disease Control and the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. Combination oral contraceptive use and the risk of endometrial cancer. JAMA 1987;257:796.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    The Cancer and Steroid Hormone Study of the Centers for Disease Control and the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. The reduction in risk of ovarian cancer associated with oral-contraceptive use. N Engl J Med 1987;316:650.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Peipert JF, Gutmann J. Oral contraceptive risk assessment: a survey of 247 educated women. Obstet Gynecol 1993;82:112.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Connell EB. Rational use of oral contraceptives in the perimenopausal woman. J Reprod Med 1993;38(suppl):136.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Stergachis A, Shy KK, Grothaus LC, et al. Tubal sterilization and the long-term risk of hysterectomy. JAMA 1990;264(22):2893–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rulin MC, Davidson AR, Philliber SG, Graves WL, Cushman LF. Long-term effect of tubal sterilization on menstrual indices and pelvic pain. Obstet Gynecol 1993;82(1):118–21.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    ParaGard (Intrauterine Copper Contraceptive) Model T380A, Prescribing Information, 1995.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Harlap S, Kost K, Forrest JD. Preventing pregnancy, protecting health: a new look at birth control choices in the United States. New York: The Alan Guttmacher Institute, 1991.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sivin I. Dose- and age-dependent ectopic pregnancy risks with intrauterine contraception. Obstet Gynecol 1992;78:291.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Farley TMM, Rosenberg MJ, Rowe PJ, et al. Intrauterine devices and pelvic inflammatory disease: an international perspective. Lancet 1992;339:785.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Alvarez F, Brache V, Fernandez E, et al. New insights on the mode of action of intrauterine contraceptive devices in women. Fertil Steril 1988;49:768.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Segal SJ, Alvarez-Sanchez F, Adejuwon CA, et al. Absence of chorionic gonadotropin in sera of women who use intrauterine devices. Fertil Steril 1985;44:214.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Darney PD, Atkinson E, Tanner S, et al. Acceptance and perceptions of Norplant among users in San Francisco, USA. Stud Fam Plann 1990;21:152.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Connell EB. Depot medroxyprogesterone acetate: clinical experience in the United States. Fem Pat, 1994;19:91.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cundy T, Evans M, Roberts H, et al. Bone density in women receiving depot medroxyprogesterone acetate for contraception. Br Med J 1991;303:13–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Swartz DB, Wingo PA, Antarsh L, Smith JC. Female sterilizations in the United States, 1987. Fam Plann Perspect 1989;21:209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Escobedo LG, Peterson HB, Grubb GS, Franks AL. Case-fatality rates for tubal sterilization in U.S. hospitals, 1979 to 1980. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1989;160:147.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York, Inc. 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Patricia J. Sulak

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations