紧急避孕效果评价的可信性研究  

Study on the credibility of estimating the efficacy of emergency contraception

作　　者：廖爱华[1] 庞雪冰[1] 李红钢[1] 周慧[1] 朱继望[1] 常翠芳[1] 左明达[1] 

机构地区：[1]华中科技大学同济医学院生殖医学中心,430030

出　　处：《中国妇幼保健》2004年第9X期33-35,共3页Maternal and Child Health Care of China

摘　　要：目的:探索以月经周期和末次月经推算受孕期与生化诊断间出现差异的原因,进而评价紧急避孕效果判断的可信性。方法:对100例要求紧急避孕服务的妇女末次月经日期、月经周期和未保护性生活时间的确信程度进行回忆问卷调查,同时以B超作为月经周期、排卵监测手段进行对比性研究。结果:51例(52.04%)妇女确信知道末次月经的日期;9例(9.18%)妇女不能准确回忆无保护性生活时间;58.16%的妇女在该研究周期中有过1次以上的性生活;32例(32.65%)妇女B超证实与她们的周期不符合;2例妊娠,其中1例根据wilcox方法评估其妊娠危险概率为0%。结论:对于一部分妇女依赖于对末次月经、性生活时间的回忆和排卵日的推算来评价紧急避孕效果的方法显然是不准确的,应采用更合理的评价方法。To explore possible discrepancies between recall data as usual menstrual cycle and the date of LMP used for calculations of efficacy of emergency contraception and biochemical data. To further study the credibility of estimating the efficacy of emergency contraception. Methods: 100 women asking for emergency contraception were given self-administered questionnaire on how certain they were of the date of their last menstrual period, of the length of their menstrual cycle and of the timing of unprotected intercourse. In contrast, B ultrasound was applied to assess the corresponding menstrual period and the event of ovulation. Results: 51 women were certain of the date of the LMP; 9 women could not recall the timing of intercourse; 58. 16% had had intercourse more than once; 32 women had B ultrasound's diagnosis that was inconsistent with their cycle day; 2 pregnancy occurred, one of which took place at 0% probability of pregnant risk based on Wilcox's method. Conclusion: The method depending on recalling the date of LMP and the timing of intercourse for calculating the date of ovulation and estimating the efficacy of emergency contraception seems to be inaccurate for a significant minority of women. As a result, a better reasonable method should be taken into consideration.

关 键 词：紧急避孕 月经周期 评价 

分 类 号：R169.41[医药卫生—公共卫生与预防医学]