Talk:GyneFix
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In addition to my removal of the sttement that Gynefix was not available in the UK, and my statement in the edit chenges that it has been available since at least 2003, the following article makes it clear that it has been available int he UK since the late 1990s: Geyoushi, B. E., Randall, S. and Stones, R. W. (2002) Gynefix: a UK experience. The European Journal of Contraception and Reproductive Health Care, 7, (1), 7-14. http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/37757/
sorry, but "not yet available" is speculative. and comparing to a bunch of other iuds not relevant unless you compare to range of birth control. tone of this reads like an ad in ways--an argument for why people should use it, not neutral info about it. Cindery
I'm having trouble researching this, since my German is not up to snuff for medical research, but some info that's available in English (I haven't tracked down a lot of it) seems to suggest that not only is the info in the page a bit unneutral, it may be downright wrong. (It seems to rely on the marketing material.) I'm still poking at it though. Kate 12:14, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
I looked into GyneFix very thoroughly when researching my IUD, and I think that the information about it in this article is misleading.
GyneFix is very little used, despite having been around for a number of years and promising to revolutionise IUDs. The theory was that the frameless device and small size would be less likely to cause increased cramping and blood loss, thus making it particularly suitable for nulliparous women or those with heavy periods. From what a number of gynaecologists have told me, this did not turn out to be the case in practice: the increase in cramping and blood flow was the same as for other types of copper IUD. There was also a theory that the expulsion rate would be lower, but again this was not borne out in practice.
In addition, the insertion procedure is much more difficult because the device has to be anchored to the uterine wall, which requires very careful placement. It takes far longer to learn how to insert this IUD, and many doctors do not have the additional time, but more importantly, there is a greatly increased risk of uterine perforation during insertion, and many doctors who have learned to insert the GyneFix have stopped because of this.
Since there are no additional benefits but there are several additional risks, it is almost impossible to find a doctor who will insert the GyneFix. Even in Europe, where there is a wider range of copper IUDs than in the US and a larger proportion of women using them, there may be no one offering the GyneFix in an entire country.
So the GyneFix is certainly not recommended for nulliparous women anywhere that I know of (apart from by the manufacturer, whose advice is not being taken by doctors). In the UK a smaller T-shaped copper IUD such as the Nova T380 is usual for nulliparous women.
I researched the Gynefix because I am nulliparous and had expelled my first IUD, and this one sounded less likely to be expelled due to the anchoring method. A number of gynaecologists warned me against it, however. Apparently several doctors at my local Family Planning Clinic (the Edinburgh one, which has a superb reputation for IUD insertion) had trained in Gynefix insertion, but all but one of them had stopped due to several perforations (which I think were the first ever perforations at this clinic). The one gynaecologist who could insert them hadn't done one in years because of their unpopularity for the above reasons. I only know of one other clinic in the UK where Gynefixes may be inserted, but again they strongly prefer not to.
Elettaria 09.09.06
[edit] Footnotes and research
I'm working on getting some research linked in here. I managed to find one article and have put it in at the end as a link, but I can't figure out the footnote system. Could someone put in a footnote at the relevent point (when discussing expulsion rates)? It's four months since I did my IUD research so I don't have all the links to hand, plus a lot of the information I got was verbal (from several doctors, clinics and the Family Planning Association helpline), which is fine for making a personal decision but not great referencing for here. I'll keep looking, but at least we have one article which discusses the problems with insertion, the relatively high expulsion rate (7.6%) found in that clinic, and that the GyneFix did not perform as well as the early trials promised.
Elettaria 15:10, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
