Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-669899f699-cf6xr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-05-05T23:28:40.664Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 13 - Nonhormonal Contraception

from Section 2A - Sexual and Reproductive Healthcare: Contraception

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 January 2024

By
Kristina Gemzell-Danielsson ,
Juan Acuna  and
Helena Kopp Kallner
Edited by
Johannes Bitzer  and
Tahir A. Mahmood
Johannes Bitzer
Affiliation:
University Women's Hospital, Basel
Tahir A. Mahmood
Affiliation:
Victoria Hospital, Kirkcaldy
Get access

Summary

For the past decade there has been an increased interest in nonhormonal contraceptive methods. In the United States the trend is an increase of 1.1–2.2% users with almost 1.4 million women in 2014 and an estimated 2.5 million women in 2020 in this category [1]. Nonhormonal, traditional or natural methods of contraception include fertility awareness–based methods (FABM), barrier, rhythm (periodic abstinence), withdrawal and lactational amenorrhea, abstinence, breastfeeding, douching or traditional folk methods. Sterilization and copper intrauterine devices (Cu-IUDs) are also nonhormonal but are not discussed further in this chapter. Here we cover methods that are not hormone-based and that are included in the barrier/spermicide or natural/traditional categories (Figure 13.1). It is important to mention that there is an abundance of adequate resources on the Internet for counseling. A limited but carefully chosen list is provided at the end of the chapter (Appendix 1).

Type
Chapter
Information
Textbook of Contraception, Sexual and Reproductive Health , pp. 97 - 108
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2024

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Kavanaugh, ML, Jerman, J. Contraceptive method use in the United States: Trends and characteristics between 2008, 2012 and 2014. Contraception. 2018;97:14–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2017.10.003.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hassoun, D. [Natural family planning methods and barrier: CNGOF contraception guidelines]. Gynecol Obstet Fertil Senol. 2018;46:873–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gofs.2018.10.002.Google ScholarPubMed
Han, L, Taub, R, Jensen, JT. Cervical mucus and contraception: What we know and what we don’t. Contraception. 2017;96:310–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2017.07.168.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sung, S, Abramovitz, A. Natural family planning. Bethesda, MD: StatPearls, 2020.Google Scholar
Klaus, H. Natural family planning: A review. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 1982;37:128–50. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006254-198202000-00026.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bradley, SEK, Polis, CB, Bankole, A, Croft, T. Global contraceptive failure rates: Who is most at risk? Stud Fam Plann. 2019;50:3–24. https://doi.org/10.1111/sifp.12085.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Polis, CB, Jones, RK. Multiple contraceptive method use and prevalence of fertility awareness based method use in the United States, 2013–2015. Contraception. 2018;98:188–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2018.04.013.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Duane, M, Contreras, A, Jensen, ET, White, A. The performance of fertility awareness–based method apps marketed to avoid pregnancy. J Am Board Fam Med. 2016;29:508–11. https://doi.org/10.3122/jabfm.2016.04.160022.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grimes, DA, Gallo, MF, Grigorieva, V et al. Fertility awareness-based methods for contraception: Systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Contraception. 2005;72:85–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2005.03.010.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Peragallo Urrutia, R, Polis, CB, Jensen, ET et al. Effectiveness of fertility awareness–based methods for pregnancy prevention: A systematic review. Obstet Gynecol. 2018;132:591–604. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000002784.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Daunter, B, Counsilman, C. Cervical mucus: Its structure and possible biological functions. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 1980;10:141–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/0028-2243(80)90056-8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Su, H-W, Yi, Y-C, Wei, T-Y et al. Detection of ovulation: A review of currently available methods. Bioeng Transl Med. 2017;2:238–46. https://doi.org/10.1002/btm2.10058.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Johnson, S, Marriott, L, Zinaman, M. Can apps and calendar methods predict ovulation with accuracy? Curr Med Res Opin. 2018;34:1587–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/03007995.2018.1475348.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nilsson, A, Ahlborg, T, Bernhardsson, S. Use of non-medical contraceptive methods: A survey of women in western Sweden. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2018;23:400–6. https://doi.org/10.1080/13625187.2018.1541079.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marston, CA, Church, K. Does the evidence support global promotion of the calendar-based Standard Days Method® of contraception? Contraception. 2016;93:492–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2016.01.006.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pyper, C. Natural family planning: Low failure rate with symptothermal method. BMJ. 1993;307:1359–60. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.307.6915.1359-c.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Soler, F, Barranco-Castillo, E. The symptothermal (double check) method: An efficient natural method of family planning. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2010;15:379–80, author reply at 381. https://doi.org/10.3109/13625187.2010.505990.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Geerling, JH. Natural family planning. Am Fam Physician. 1995;52:1749–56, 1759.Google ScholarPubMed
Bouchard, TP, Genuis, SJ. Personal fertility monitors for contraception. Can Med Assoc J. 2011;183:73–6. https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.090195.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bonnar, J, Flynn, A, Freundl, G et al. Personal hormone monitoring for contraception. Br J Fam Plann. 1999;24:128–34.Google ScholarPubMed
Moglia, ML, Nguyen, HV, Chyjek, K et al. Evaluation of smartphone menstrual cycle tracking applications using an adapted APPLICATIONS scoring system. Obstet Gynecol. 2016;127:1153–60. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000001444.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Freis, A, Freundl-Schütt, T, Wallwiener, LM et al. Plausibility of menstrual cycle apps claiming to support conception. Front Public Health. 2018;6:98–102. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2018.00098.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zwingerman, R, Chaikof, M, Jones, C. A critical appraisal of fertility and menstrual tracking apps for the iPhone. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jogc.2019.09.023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gambier-Ross, K, McLernon, DJ, Morgan, HM. A mixed methods exploratory study of women’s relationships with and uses of fertility tracking apps. Digit Health. 2018;4:2055207618785077. https://doi.org/10.1177/2055207618785077.Google ScholarPubMed
Berglund Scherwitzl, E, Lindén Hirschberg, A, Scherwitzl, R. Identification and prediction of the fertile window using NaturalCycles. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2015;20:403–8. https://doi.org/10.3109/13625187.2014.988210.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Berglund Scherwitzl, E, Lundberg, O, Kopp Kallner, H et al. Perfect-use and typical-use Pearl Index of a contraceptive mobile app. Contraception. 2017;96:420–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2017.08.014.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Evans, WD, Ulasevich, A, Hatheway, M, Deperthes, B. Systematic review of peer-reviewed literature on global condom promotion programs. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17072262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gossman, W, Shaeffer, AD, McNabb, DM. Condoms. StatPearls, 2020.Google Scholar
Sanders, SA, Yarber, WL, Kaufman, EL et al. Condom use errors and problems: A global view. Sex Health. 2012;9:81–95. https://doi.org/10.1071/SH11095.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Raidoo, S, Kaneshiro, B. Contraception counseling for adolescents. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2017;29:310–15. https://doi.org/10.1097/GCO.0000000000000390.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beksinska, M, Wong, R, Smit, J. Male and female condoms: Their key role in pregnancy and STI/HIV prevention. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2020;66:55–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2019.12.001.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Maksut, JL, Eaton, LA. Female condoms = missed opportunities: Lessons learned from promotion-centered interventions. Women’s Health Issues. 2015;25:366–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.whi.2015.03.015.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bounds, W. Female condoms. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 1997;2:113–16. https://doi.org/10.3109/13625189709167464.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Edouard, L. The renaissance of barrier methods. J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care. 2012;38:131–3. https://doi.org/10.1136/jfprhc-2012-100314.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mauck, C, Callahan, M, Weiner, DH, Dominik, R. A comparative study of the safety and efficacy of FemCap, a new vaginal barrier contraceptive, and the Ortho All-Flex diaphragm: The FemCap Investigators’ Group. Contraception. 1999;60:71–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0010-7824(99)00068-2.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lech, MM. Spermicides 2002: An overview. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2002;7:173–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dev, R, Kohler, P, Feder, M et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of postpartum contraceptive use among women in low- and middle-income countries. Reprod Health. 2019;16:154. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12978-019-0824-4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tredway, DR, Umezaki, CU, Mishell, DR Jr, Settlage, DS. Effect of intrauterine devices on sperm transport in the human being: Preliminary report. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1975;123(7):734–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Winner, B, Peipert, JF, Zhao, Q et al. Effectiveness of long-acting reversible contraception. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(21):1998–2007.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
World Health Organization. Medical eligibility criteria for contraceptive use. 5th edition. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2015. www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241549158.Google Scholar
Castellsagué, X, Thompson, WD, Dubrow, R. Intra-uterine contraception and the risk of endometrial cancer. Int J Cancer. 1993;54(6):911–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Milsom, I, Andersson, K Jonasson, K, Lindstedt, G, Rybo, G. Contraception: The influence of the Gyne-T 380S IUD on menstrual blood loss and iron status. Contraception. 1995;52(3):175–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Whiteman, MK, Tyler, CP, Folger, SG, Gaffield, ME, Curtis, KM. When can a woman have an intrauterine device inserted? A systematic review. Contraception. 2013;87(5):666–73.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lopez, LM, Bernholc, A, Hubacher, D, Stuart, G, Van Vliet, HA. Immediate postpartum insertion of intrauterine device for contraception. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;(6):CD003036.Google ScholarPubMed
Gemzell-Danielsson, K, Jensen, JT, Monteiro, I et al. Interventions for the prevention of pain associated with the placement of intrauterine contraceptives: An updated review. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2019;98(12):1500–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sääv, I, Aronsson, A, Marions, L, Stephansson, O, Gemzell-Danielsson, K. Cervical priming with sublingual misoprostol prior to insertion of an intrauterine device in nulliparous women: A randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod. 2007;22(10):2647–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mishell, DR Jr, Bell, JH, Good, RG, Moyer, DL. The intrauterine device: A bacteriologic study of the endometrial cavity. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1966;96 (1):119–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0002-9378(16)34650-6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
FSRH Guidance. Intrauterine contraception. 2015. bit.ly/3kVvj1Y.Google Scholar
Farley, TM, Rosenberg, MJ, Rowe, PJ, Chen, JH, Meirik, O. Intrauterine devices and pelvic inflammatory disease: An international perspective. Lancet. 1992;339(8796):785–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hubacher, D, Lara-Ricalde, R, Taylor, DJ, Guerra-Infante, F, Guzmán-Rodríguez, R. Use of copper intrauterine devices and the risk of tubal infertility among nulligravid women. N Engl J Med. 2001;345(8):561–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brahmi, D, Steenland, MW, Renner, RM, Gaffield, ME, Curtis, KM. Pregnancy outcomes with an IUD in situ: A systematic review. Contraception. 2012;85(2):131–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tepper, NK, Steenland, MW, Gaffield, ME, Marchbanks, PA, Curtis, KM. Retention of intrauterine devices in women who acquire pelvic inflammatory disease: A systematic review. Contraception. 2013;87(5):655–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×