Background: The modern intrauterine contraceptive device (IUCD) is a highly effective, safe, private, long-acting, coitus-independent, and rapidly reversible method of contraception with few side methods of contraception today. Aims and Objectives: This study was carried out to find out the proportion of women accepting postpartum intrauterine contraceptive devices (PPIUCD) insertion and to describe the complications following insertion. Materials and Methods: It was a prospective, interventional study conducted during January-December 2025 among 587 parturient undergoing normal vaginal or cesarian deliveries in a Medical college of West Bengal. Data were collected by pre-designed and pre-tested questionnaire, a checklist, and a PPIUCD follow-up card. Collected data were entered into MS-Excel sheet, double checked, and principles of descriptive statistics were used. Chi-square test was done. For analysis, the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences version 20 was used. Results: Almost 34% (202 of 587) of the parturients accepted insertion of PPIUCD as a method of contraception. The majority of the PPIUCD acceptors were in the age range of 20–29 (48.51%), belonging to Muslim religion (56.93%), and were having primary level of education (90.1%). More than 75% were housewives. More than half (55.0%) of those women accepted PPIUCD due to its long-term effect. Majority of the acceptors wanted to have a pregnancy within the next 3–5 years. The majority of parturients (75%) had some complaints at 6 weeks. The difference between time of IUCD expulsion among the parturient accepting within 10 min, immediate, and trans cesarian insertions was statistically significant. The safety profile of PPIUCD was established with no reported cases of perforation, low expulsion rates, minimal instances of pelvic infection, and a few cases of lost strings. Conclusion: Although the acceptance of IUCD was considerably high lack of awareness regarding IUCD insertion is still the challenge in this modern age of contraception.
Kundu et al. (Fri,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: