Influencing factors of different contraceptive methods on female fertility

doi:10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2023.01.015

Objective

To investigate influencing factors of subsequent pregnancy ability of childbearing-aged women after the discontinuation of intrauterine device (IUD).

Methods

A retrospective analysis was conducted by extracting 15 031 pregnant women from the Lianyungang Maternal Health Care System who gave birth in hospitals at all levels in Lianyungang area from January 2016 to December 2018. They were divided into IUD group (discontinuation of IUD, n=7 452) and condom group (discontinuation of condom, n=7 579) according to the different discontinuation of contraceptive measures. From January 30, 2019 to November 30, 2020, the baseline survey, first follow-up visit after the birth of second child were completed and subsequent pregnancy ability of childbearing-aged women after the discontinuation of IUD were summarized. This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Lianyungang Maternal and Child Health Hospital, Jiangsu Province (Approve No. LYG-MEP202101).

Results

① There were no statistically significant differences between two groups of age, occupation, body mass index (BMI), and number of miscarriages (P>0.05). ② There were statistically significant differences in the subsequent pregnancy time of childbearing women at different ages, abortion frequency, delivery mode of the first child and contraceptive time between the two groups (P<0.05). ③There was no significant difference in the cumulative pregnancy rate in 6, 12, 18 and 24 months after the cessation of contraception between the two groups (P>0.05). ④ The results of COX multivariate regression analysis on the influencing factors of fertility in women of childbearing age showed that age ≥35 years old (HR=1.063, 95%CI: 1.027-1.101, P<0.05), body mass index < 18.5 kg/m² (HR=0.867, 95%CI: 0.802-0.938, P<0.001), body mass index ≥24.0 kg/m²(HR=1.265, 95%CI: 1.054-1.519, P<0.05), the number of abortions was 1-2 (HR=1.439, 95%CI: 1.349-1.534, P<0.001), the number of abortion ≥3 (HR=1.352, 95%CI: 1.268-1.441, P<0.001), were independent risk factors affecting fertility in women of childbearing age.

Conclusions

Childbearing-aged women should avoid advanced pregnancy, control their weight reasonably and reduce the number of artificial termination of pregnancy. Proper use of the IUD has no effect on the fertility of women of childbearing age after removal of the IUD.

Key words: Intrauterine devices, Condoms, Number of pregnancies, Cesarean section, Risk factors, Retrospective studies, Pregnant women

表1 2组停用避孕措施后生育二胎育龄妇女的一般临床资料比较[例数(%)]

组别	例数	年龄(岁)		职业		BMI(kg/m²)
组别	例数	<35	≥35	有正式工作	无正式工作	<18.5	18.5~23.9	≥24.0
IUD组	7 452	2 615(35.1)	4 837(64.9)	1 383(18.6)	6 069(81.4)	56(0.8)	7 198(96.5)	198(2.7)
避孕套组	7 579	2 679(35.4)	4 900(64.6)	1 448(19.1)	6 131(80.9)	86(1.1)	7 287(96.2)	206(2.7)
χ²值		0.108		0.734		5.971
P值		0.378		0.202		0.051
组别	例数	流产次数			第1胎分娩方式		第1胎异常分娩结局
组别	例数	0次	1~2次	≥3次	剖宫产术	阴道分娩	出生缺陷	死胎
IUD组	7 452	4 065(54.6)	3 030(40.6)	357(4.8)	2 243(30.1)	5 209(69.9)	16(0.2)	19(0.2)
避孕套组	7 579	4 202(55.4)	3 022(39.9)	355(4.7)	2 391(31.6)	5 188(68.4)	18(0.2)	19(0.2)
χ²值		1.214			3.696		0.062
P值		0.545			0.055		0.803

表1 2组停用避孕措施后生育二胎育龄妇女的一般临床资料比较[例数(%)]

组别	例数	年龄(岁)		职业		BMI(kg/m²)
组别	例数	<35	≥35	有正式工作	无正式工作	<18.5	18.5~23.9	≥24.0
IUD组	7 452	2 615(35.1)	4 837(64.9)	1 383(18.6)	6 069(81.4)	56(0.8)	7 198(96.5)	198(2.7)
避孕套组	7 579	2 679(35.4)	4 900(64.6)	1 448(19.1)	6 131(80.9)	86(1.1)	7 287(96.2)	206(2.7)
χ²值		0.108		0.734		5.971
P值		0.378		0.202		0.051
组别	例数	流产次数			第1胎分娩方式		第1胎异常分娩结局
组别	例数	0次	1~2次	≥3次	剖宫产术	阴道分娩	出生缺陷	死胎
IUD组	7 452	4 065(54.6)	3 030(40.6)	357(4.8)	2 243(30.1)	5 209(69.9)	16(0.2)	19(0.2)
避孕套组	7 579	4 202(55.4)	3 022(39.9)	355(4.7)	2 391(31.6)	5 188(68.4)	18(0.2)	19(0.2)
χ²值		1.214			3.696		0.062
P值		0.545			0.055		0.803

表2 2组停用避孕措施后生育二胎育龄妇女的再次受孕时间比较

组别	例数	年龄<35岁		年龄≥35岁		流产次数为0次		流产次数为1~2次		流产次数≥3次
组别	例数	例数	M(Q₁, Q₃)	例数	M(Q₁, Q₃)	例数	M(Q₁, Q₃)	例数	M(Q₁, Q₃)	例数	M(Q₁, Q₃)
IUD组	7 452	2 615	4(3，6)	4 837	6(3，7)	4 065	4(3，6)	3 030	5(3，6)	357	4(1，9)
避孕套组	7 579	2 679	4(1，9)	4 900	3(1，8)	4 202	3(1，8)	3 022	3(1，9)	355	6(4，8)
Z值		－10.84		－15.75		－12.14		－12.25		－4.49
P值		<0.001		<0.001		<0.001		<0.001		<0.001
组别	例数	第1胎为剖宫产术分娩		第1胎为自然分娩		避孕时间≤5年		避孕时间为5~10年		避孕时间≥10年
组别	例数	例数	M(Q₁, Q₃)	例数	M(Q₁, Q₃)	例数	M(Q₁, Q₃)	例数	M(Q₁, Q₃)	例数	M(Q₁, Q₃)
IUD组	7 452	2 243	5(1，6)	5 209	5(3，6)	3 368	5(3，6)	3 853	4(3，6)	231	5(3，6)
避孕套组	7 579	2 391	3(1，6)	5 188	4(1，9)	5 256	3(1，9)	2 051	4(1，8)	272	3(1，6)
Z值		－13.29		－11.86		－14.47		－9.71		－2.63
P值		<0.001		<0.001		<0.001		<0.001		0.009

表2 2组停用避孕措施后生育二胎育龄妇女的再次受孕时间比较

组别	例数	年龄<35岁		年龄≥35岁		流产次数为0次		流产次数为1~2次		流产次数≥3次
组别	例数	例数	M(Q₁, Q₃)	例数	M(Q₁, Q₃)	例数	M(Q₁, Q₃)	例数	M(Q₁, Q₃)	例数	M(Q₁, Q₃)
IUD组	7 452	2 615	4(3，6)	4 837	6(3，7)	4 065	4(3，6)	3 030	5(3，6)	357	4(1，9)
避孕套组	7 579	2 679	4(1，9)	4 900	3(1，8)	4 202	3(1，8)	3 022	3(1，9)	355	6(4，8)
Z值		－10.84		－15.75		－12.14		－12.25		－4.49
P值		<0.001		<0.001		<0.001		<0.001		<0.001
组别	例数	第1胎为剖宫产术分娩		第1胎为自然分娩		避孕时间≤5年		避孕时间为5~10年		避孕时间≥10年
组别	例数	例数	M(Q₁, Q₃)	例数	M(Q₁, Q₃)	例数	M(Q₁, Q₃)	例数	M(Q₁, Q₃)	例数	M(Q₁, Q₃)
IUD组	7 452	2 243	5(1，6)	5 209	5(3，6)	3 368	5(3，6)	3 853	4(3，6)	231	5(3，6)
避孕套组	7 579	2 391	3(1，6)	5 188	4(1，9)	5 256	3(1，9)	2 051	4(1，8)	272	3(1，6)
Z值		－13.29		－11.86		－14.47		－9.71		－2.63
P值		<0.001		<0.001		<0.001		<0.001		0.009

表3 2组停用避孕措施后生育二胎育龄妇女不同时间累计妊娠率比较[例数(%)]

组别	例数	<6个月	<12个月	<18个月	<24个月
IUD组	7 452	4 828(64.8)	7 293(97.9)	7 364(98.8)	7 421(99.6)
避孕套组	7 579	4 957(65.4)	7 409(97.8)	7 510(99.1)	7 556(99.7)
χ²值		0.63	0.66	0.11	0.28
P值		0.428	0.344	0.061	0.155

表3 2组停用避孕措施后生育二胎育龄妇女不同时间累计妊娠率比较[例数(%)]

组别	例数	<6个月	<12个月	<18个月	<24个月
IUD组	7 452	4 828(64.8)	7 293(97.9)	7 364(98.8)	7 421(99.6)
避孕套组	7 579	4 957(65.4)	7 409(97.8)	7 510(99.1)	7 556(99.7)
χ²值		0.63	0.66	0.11	0.28
P值		0.428	0.344	0.061	0.155

表4 停用避孕措施1年内影响育龄妇女再次受孕危险因素的多因素COX回归分析

变量	B	SE	Wald值	HR值	HR值95%CI	P值
年龄≥35岁(vs<35岁者)	0.061	0.018	11.954	1.063	1.027~1.101	0.001
有正式工作(vs无正式工作者)	0.006	0.021	0.086	1.006	0.965~1.049	0.771
BMI(vs BMI为18.5~23.9 kg/m²者)
<18.5 kg/m²	－0.143	0.04	12.678	0.867	0.802~0.938	<0.001
≥24.0 kg/m²	0.235	0.093	6.373	1.265	1.054~1.519	0.012
流产次数(vs流产次数为0次者)
1~2次	0.364	0.033	122.415	1.439	1.349~1.534	<0.001
≥3次	0.301	0.033	85.001	1.352	1.268~1.441	<0.001
第1胎为阴道分娩(vs剖宫产术分娩者)	－0.022	0.018	1.477	0.979	0.945~1.013	0.224
使用IUD(vs使用避孕套者)	－0.005	0.018	0.094	0.995	0.961~1.029	0.759
避孕时长(vs避孕时长为≤5年者)
5~10年	－0.050	0.047	1.133	0.951	0.868~1.043	0.287
≥10年	－0.022	0.047	0.209	0.979	0.892~1.074	0.648

表4 停用避孕措施1年内影响育龄妇女再次受孕危险因素的多因素COX回归分析

变量	B	SE	Wald值	HR值	HR值95%CI	P值
年龄≥35岁(vs<35岁者)	0.061	0.018	11.954	1.063	1.027~1.101	0.001
有正式工作(vs无正式工作者)	0.006	0.021	0.086	1.006	0.965~1.049	0.771
BMI(vs BMI为18.5~23.9 kg/m²者)
<18.5 kg/m²	－0.143	0.04	12.678	0.867	0.802~0.938	<0.001
≥24.0 kg/m²	0.235	0.093	6.373	1.265	1.054~1.519	0.012
流产次数(vs流产次数为0次者)
1~2次	0.364	0.033	122.415	1.439	1.349~1.534	<0.001
≥3次	0.301	0.033	85.001	1.352	1.268~1.441	<0.001
第1胎为阴道分娩(vs剖宫产术分娩者)	－0.022	0.018	1.477	0.979	0.945~1.013	0.224
使用IUD(vs使用避孕套者)	－0.005	0.018	0.094	0.995	0.961~1.029	0.759
避孕时长(vs避孕时长为≤5年者)
5~10年	－0.050	0.047	1.133	0.951	0.868~1.043	0.287
≥10年	－0.022	0.047	0.209	0.979	0.892~1.074	0.648

[1]	唐艳，徐克惠，钟兰萍. 宫内节育器并发症临床分析 [J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版)，2010，6(1): 47-49. DOI: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2010.01.116.
[2]	顾向应，张艺珊，吴尚纯．长效可逆避孕方法的新进展[J]．中国计划生育学杂志，2019, 27(5): 548-551. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-8189.2019.05.001.
[3]	王利. 影响女性宫内节育器异位的相关因素分析[J]. 中国实用医药，2019, 14(36): 50-51. DOI: 10.14163/j.cnki.11-5547/r.2019.36.026.
[4]	向征，王鑫，杨帆. 三胎政策对女性员工职业生涯规划影响研究[J]. 现代管理，2022, 12(8): 1029-1037. DOI：10.12677/MM.2022.128138.
[5]	Girum T, Wasie A. Return of fertility after discontinuation of contraception: a systematic review and meta-analysis [J]. Contracept Reprod Med, 2018, 3: 9. DOI: 10.1186/s40834-018-0064-y.
[6]	Stoddard AM, Xu H, Madden T, et al. Fertility after intrauterine device removal: a pilot study [J]. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care, 2015, 20(3): 223-230. DOI: 10.3109/13625187.2015.1010639.
[7]	杨秋红，喻员员，张晓辉，等. 宫内节育器取出后生育力恢复情况分析[J]. 中国计划生育学杂志，2019, 27(1): 20-22. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-8189.2019.01.004.
[8]	Abdu MI, Mousa AM, Abd EG, et al. Histological study of hysteroscopy-guided endometrial biopsy from secondary infertile patients after removal of a copper intrauterine contraceptive device [J]. Egypt J Histol, 2013, 36(4): 805-813. DOI: 10.1097/01.EHX.0000437148.20026.7d.
[9]	林秀红，黄西戎，刘建辉，等. 600例大宫腔放置吉妮致美宫内节育器的临床效果观察 [J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版)，2009，5(6): 594-597. DOI: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2009.06.108.
[10]	杨秀霞. 育龄期女性人工流产术后继发性不孕的危险因素分析[J]. 中国妇幼保健，2020, 35(15): 2856-2858. DOI: 10.19829/j.zgfybj.issn.1001-4411.2020.15.039.
[11]	程晓彤，邓姗，孙爱军，等. 剖宫产史对继发性不孕影响的病例对照研究[J]. 生殖医学杂志，2019, 28(8): 901-905. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-3845.2019.08.010.
[12]	温彩萍．宫内节育器避孕妇女出现继发性不孕的危险因素分析[J]．中国实用医刊，2020, 47(9): 63-65. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn115689-20200110-00234.
[13]	黎诗怡，谭毅，黄妙云，等. 贺州地区生育需求女性宫内节育器取出后继发不孕的流行病学研究[J]. 实用妇科内分泌电子杂志，2019, 6(32): 46-47.
[14]	杨冬，王丽峰，张颖. 育龄期女性使用宫内节育器及避孕套后继发性不孕的危险因素研究[J]. 现代医院，2021, 21(7): 1119-1121, 1125. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-332X.2021.07.041.
[15]	杨月华，王冠融，周健，等. 放置宫内节育器与继发性不孕关系的队列研究[J]. 中国计划生育学杂志，2020, 28(1): 13-17. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-8189.2020.01.003.
[16]	Esposito CP. Intrauterine devices in the context of gonococcal infection, chlamydial infection, and pelvic inflammatory disease: not mutually exclusive [J]. J Midwifery Womens Health, 2020, 65(4): 562-566. DOI: 10.1111/jmwh.13120.
[17]	符琴，刘玉珠，贾利平，等. 放置IUD术后生殖道感染发生及阴道灌洗液炎症因子水平[J]. 中国计划生育学杂志，2020, 28(12): 100-103. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-8189.2020.12.023.

[1]	Jingyu Qian, Mingming Zheng. Interpretation of the Italian guidelines on non-invasive and invasive prenatal diagnosis：executive summary of recommendations for practice the Italian Society for Obstetrics and Gynecology（SIGO）[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2024, 20(05): 486-492.
[2]	Xialin Li, Fang He. Risk assessment and early warning system for postpartum hemorrhage[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2024, 20(05): 498-503.
[3]	Ziyang Liu, Jianjian Cui, Yin Zhao. Current research status on obstetric disseminated intravascular coagulation and its scoring system[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2024, 20(05): 511-518.
[4]	Fanying Zeng, Jie Ruan, Xinghui Liu, Guolin He. Current status of perinatal medicine advances under the new reproductive situation and coping strategies in prenatal care[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2024, 20(05): 519-524.
[5]	Hongchu Huang, Meirong Huang, Lihong Wen. Risk factor analysis and risk prediction model of granulocytopenia infection after chemotherapy in patients with hematological malignancies[J]. Chinese Journal of Experimental and Clinical Infectious Diseases(Electronic Edition), 2024, 18(05): 285-292.
[6]	Bin He, Jinfeng Ma. Risk factors for splenic hilar lymph node metastasis in gastric cancer[J]. Chinese Journal of Operative Procedures of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2024, 18(06): 694-699.
[7]	Kai Lin, Yong Pan, Gaoping Zhao, Chun Yang. Analysis of risk factors and prevention strategy of incisional hernia after stoma reduction surgery[J]. Chinese Journal of Hernia and Abdominal Wall Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2024, 18(06): 634-638.
[8]	Chuang Yang, Xue Ma. Analysis of risk factors for postoperative infection of abdominal wall hernia[J]. Chinese Journal of Hernia and Abdominal Wall Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2024, 18(06): 693-696.
[9]	Yan Zhou, Ying Li, Xiaobing Zhou, Fahui Cheng, Hengzheng He. Efficacy of different types of mesh combined with Nissen fundoplication for repairing hiatal hernia and potential risk factors for recurrence[J]. Chinese Journal of Hernia and Abdominal Wall Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2024, 18(05): 528-533.
[10]	Weiwei Zhang, Qi Chen, Heyu Weng, Liang Huang. Preliminary study on prediction of lymph node metastasis of T1 colorectal cancer by random forest model[J]. Chinese Journal of Colorectal Diseases(Electronic Edition), 2024, 13(05): 389-393.
[11]	Nan Si, Hongtao Sun. Research progress on risk factors of renal dysfunction after traumatic brain injury[J]. Chinese Journal of Brain Diseases and Rehabilitation(Electronic Edition), 2024, 14(05): 300-305.
[12]	Huiying Chen, Minshan Qiu, Hanquan Shao. Construction and application effect of risk factor model for intestinal mucosal barrier function damage induced by sepsis[J]. Chinese Journal of Digestion and Medical Imageology(Electronic Edition), 2024, 14(05): 448-452.
[13]	Shirui Yan, Hui Xiong. Identification of risk factors for acute kidney injury in patients with infective endocarditis and prediction of death risk in such patients with acute kidney injury[J]. Chinese Journal of Clinicians(Electronic Edition), 2024, 18(07): 618-624.
[14]	Wenzhe Li, Yi Wang, Jian Cui, Qihang Zheng, Jingyan Wang, Xiangyou Yu. Critically ill patients with acute renal dysfunction in Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region：A crosssection study[J]. Chinese Journal of Hygiene Rescue(Electronic Edition), 2024, 10(05): 269-276.
[15]	Zhichao Liu, Fengyun Hu, Chunli Wen. Risk factors and geographical correlation of stroke in Shanxi Province[J]. Chinese Journal of Cerebrovascular Diseases(Electronic Edition), 2024, 18(05): 424-433.

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Please choose a citation manager

Content to export