Introduction of the GyneFix intra-uterine device into the UK: Client satisfaction survey and casenotes review

Objective To assess the first year9s use with the GyneFix intra-uterine device. This has been used in Liverpool since early 1997. It is offered mainly to nulliparous women wishing to use an effective non-hormonal method and parous women who have had pain with, or expulsion of, a framed device previously. It is also used as emergency contraception. Design Retrospective study, by means of casenote review and client questionnaire. Participants All GyneFix users from February 1997 to January 1998; 215 women in total. Main outcome measures Data were extracted from casenotes to determine reasons for choice of GyneFix, parity, whether the insertion was planned or as an emergency measure, problems reported at follow-up and reasons for removal. Users were asked by questionnaire to comment on insertion procedure, menstrual or other changes since insertion and to state their overall satisfaction. Results Over half of the users (57%) were nulliparous and a quarter of insertions were for emergency contraceptive use. A third reported that insertion was 9very painful9. Half reported that their periods had become heavier since insertion, but only 8% said that they were now unmanageable. Unacceptable bleeding was the most common reason for removal. Some reported intermenstrual bleeding and dysmenorrhoea. Satisfaction with the GyneFix was high; 86% of questionnaire responders said that they would recommend it to a friend. Conclusion The GyneFix is well accepted in Liverpool in appropriately selected clients, and is an effective nonhormonal method for nulliparous as well as parous women.