The Experts below are selected from a list of 216 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Giuseppe Benagiano - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Non-surgical Female Sterilization with quinacrine: an update.
Contraception, 2001Co-Authors: Giuseppe BenagianoAbstract:The intrauterine installation of quinacrine represents a simple, inexpensive, effective, and seemingly safe method of non-surgical Female Sterilization. Existing clinical data on its use are very encouraging: Results of a large study conducted in Vietnam with an overall sample of over 30,000 women showed high effectiveness; in addition, when a retrospective study was conducted in these women, cumulative 5-year pregnancy rates were estimated to be 13% in women younger than 35 years and 6.8% in the women older than 35. Overall, failure rates with quinacrine have been estimated, at 10 years, to be between 1.9 and 4 times higher than those obtainable with conventional surgical procedures of tubal interruption. Unfortunately, existing toxicology for topical use of quinacrine pellets is incomplete. This prompted an expert group convened by WHO, to comment, in 1994, that the toxicology of locally applied quinacrine is inadequate. To counter this statement the proponents of the method argue that it is unfair to apply the stringent pre-clinical requirements that are mandatory in the industrialized world, to methods utilized in countries plagued by both high fertility and high maternal mortality. This controversy will soon be resolved since conventional toxicological evaluation is now underway. In conclusion, the future of quinacrine for non-surgical Female Sterilization will depend on the results of long-term animal studies, as well as the retrospective human studies now being carried out.
Robert S. Dembo - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Female Sterilization and Cognitive Disability in the United States, 2011-2015.
Obstetrics and gynecology, 2018Co-Authors: Monika Mitra, Susan L. Parish, Anne Valentine, Robert S. DemboAbstract:OBJECTIVE:To compare Female Sterilization among three mutually exclusive groups of Females: 1) those without any self-reported disability, 2) those with noncognitive disabilities (sensory or physical disabilities), and 3) those with cognitive disabilities.METHODS:We conducted a secondary analysis of
Fredrick Makumbi - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
desire for Female Sterilization among women wishing to limit births in rural rakai uganda
Contraception, 2015Co-Authors: Tom Lutalo, Ronald H Gray, Sanyukta Mathur, Maria J Wawer, David Guwatudde, John S Santelli, Fred Nalugoda, Fredrick MakumbiAbstract:Abstract Objective Uganda has an unmet need for family planning of 34% and a total fertility rate of 6.2. We assessed the desire for Female Sterilization among sexually active women who wanted to stop childbearing in rural Rakai district, Uganda. Study design 7192 sexually active women enrolled in a community cohort between 2002 and 2008 were asked about fertility intentions. Those stating that they did not want another child (limiters) were asked whether they would be willing to accept Female Sterilization, if available. Trends in desire for Sterilization were determined by chi-square test for trend, and Modified Poisson regression was used to estimate prevalence rate ratios and 95% confidence intervals of the associations between desire for Sterilization and socio-demographic characteristics and HIV status. Results From 2002 to 2008, the proportion of limiters dropped (from 47.2% to 43.7%; p =3), being HIV-infected and having received HIV counseling and testing. Conclusion There is latent and growing desire for Sterilization in this population. Our findings suggest a need to increase permanent contraception services for women who want to limit childbearing in this setting. Implications A large unmet need for permanent Female contraception services exists in Uganda. Efforts to increase the method mix by increasing permanent contraception services could reduce fertility rates and undesired births.
Monika Mitra - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Female Sterilization and Cognitive Disability in the United States, 2011-2015.
Obstetrics and gynecology, 2018Co-Authors: Monika Mitra, Susan L. Parish, Anne Valentine, Robert S. DemboAbstract:OBJECTIVE:To compare Female Sterilization among three mutually exclusive groups of Females: 1) those without any self-reported disability, 2) those with noncognitive disabilities (sensory or physical disabilities), and 3) those with cognitive disabilities.METHODS:We conducted a secondary analysis of
Ananda Sen - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Female Sterilization is more common among women with physical and or sensory disabilities than women without disabilities in the united states
Disability and Health Journal, 2017Co-Authors: Michael M. Mckee, Kimberly S. Mckee, Michelle A. Meade, Melissa A. Plegue, Ananda SenAbstract:Abstract Background Female Sterilization accounts for 50% of all contraceptive use in the U.S. The extent to which U.S. women with physical and/or sensory disabilities have undergone Female Sterilization is unknown. Objective Our primary objective was to determine the prevalence of Sterilization for women with physical/sensory disabilities, and compare this to the prevalence for women without disabilities. We also compared use of long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARC) methods between women with and without disabilities. Methods We conducted a secondary analysis of data from the National Survey of Family Growth 2011–2013, a population-based survey of U.S. women aged 15–44. Bivariate comparisons between women with and without disabilities by Female Sterilization and LARC use were conducted using chi-square tests. Using logistic regression, we estimated the odds of Female Sterilization based upon disability status. Results Women with physical/sensory disabilities accounted for 9.3% of the total sample (N = 4966). Among women with disabilities only, 28.2% had undergone Female Sterilization, representing 1.2 million women nationally. LARC use was lower among women with disabilities than those without disabilities (5.4%, 9.3%, respectively, p Conclusions The odds of Female Sterilization is higher among women with physical/sensory disabilities than those without disabilities. Future research is necessary to understand factors contributing to this finding, including possible underutilization of LARC methods.
-
Female Sterilization is more common among women with physical and/or sensory disabilities than women without disabilities in the United States.
Disability and health journal, 2017Co-Authors: Michael M. Mckee, Kimberly S. Mckee, Michelle A. Meade, Melissa A. Plegue, Ananda SenAbstract:Abstract Background Female Sterilization accounts for 50% of all contraceptive use in the U.S. The extent to which U.S. women with physical and/or sensory disabilities have undergone Female Sterilization is unknown. Objective Our primary objective was to determine the prevalence of Sterilization for women with physical/sensory disabilities, and compare this to the prevalence for women without disabilities. We also compared use of long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARC) methods between women with and without disabilities. Methods We conducted a secondary analysis of data from the National Survey of Family Growth 2011–2013, a population-based survey of U.S. women aged 15–44. Bivariate comparisons between women with and without disabilities by Female Sterilization and LARC use were conducted using chi-square tests. Using logistic regression, we estimated the odds of Female Sterilization based upon disability status. Results Women with physical/sensory disabilities accounted for 9.3% of the total sample (N = 4966). Among women with disabilities only, 28.2% had undergone Female Sterilization, representing 1.2 million women nationally. LARC use was lower among women with disabilities than those without disabilities (5.4%, 9.3%, respectively, p Conclusions The odds of Female Sterilization is higher among women with physical/sensory disabilities than those without disabilities. Future research is necessary to understand factors contributing to this finding, including possible underutilization of LARC methods.
