Top Abstract Purchase Related
Home
>
Node
>
Subnode

The adjusted contraceptive score (ACS) improves the overall performance of behavioural and barrier contraceptive methods

Custo, G.; Saitto, C.; Cerza, S.; Sertoli, G.

Advances in Contraceptive Delivery Systems Cds 3(4): 367-373

1987

ISSN/ISBN: 1012-8689
PMID: 12341907
Document Number: 636361
The Adjusted Contraceptive Score (ACS) is a new scoring method intended to choose from several behavioural and barrier contraceptive methods; it was designed to increase women contraceptive compliance as a mean to improve overall contraceptive performance. The ACS was compared with ordinary contraceptive counselling and was demonstrated to significantly narrow the range of contraceptive choice, to promote a significant abandonment of 'coitus interruptus' as a contraceptive method, and to significantly heighten the women satisfaction. A smaller rate of unwanted pregnancies was also observed in the ACS group than in controls.

Document emailed within 1 workday
Secure & encrypted payments

Gemzell-Danielsson, K.; Cho, S.; Inki, P.; Mansour, D.; Reid, R.; Bahamondes, L. 2012: Use of contraceptive methods and contraceptive recommendations among health care providers actively involved in contraceptive counseling -- results of an international survey in 10 countries Contraception 86(6): 631-638
Gemzell-Danielsson, K.; Cho, S.; Inki, P.; Mansour, D.; Reid, R.; Bahamondes, L. 2012: Use of contraceptive methods and contraceptive recommendations among health care providers actively involved in contraceptive counseling -- results of an international survey in 10 countries Contraception 86(6): 631-638
Gemzell-Danielsson, K.; Cho, S.; Inki, P.; Mansour, D.; Reid, R.; Bahamondes, L. 2012: Use of contraceptive methods and contraceptive recommendations among health care providers actively involved in contraceptive counseling -- results of an international survey in 10 countries Contraception 86(6): 631-638
Trussell, J.; Sturgen, K.; Strickler, J.; Dominik, R. 1994: Comparative contraceptive efficacy of the female condom and other barrier methods Family Planning Perspectives 26(2): 66-72
Lemberg, E. 1984: The vaginal contraceptive sponge: a new non-prescription barrier contraceptive Nurse Practitioner 9(10): 24-25; 29-32, 37
Hildesheim, A.; Brinton, L.A.; Mallin, K.; Lehman, H.F.; Stolley, P.; Savitz, D.A.; Levine, R. 1990: Barrier and spermicidal contraceptive methods and risk of invasive cervical cancer Epidemiology 1(4): 266-272
Erickson, P.I. 1996: Contraceptive methods: do Hispanic adolescents and their family planning care providers think about contraceptive methods the same way? Medical Anthropology 17(1): 65-82
Bahamondes, L.; Valeria Bahamondes, M.; Shulman, L.P. 2015: Non-contraceptive benefits of hormonal and intrauterine reversible contraceptive methods Human Reproduction Update 21(5): 640-651
Bahamondes, L.; Valeria Bahamondes, M.; Shulman, L.P. 2015: Non-contraceptive benefits of hormonal and intrauterine reversible contraceptive methods Human Reproduction Update 21(5): 640-651
2011: Update to CDC's U.S. Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use, 2010: revised recommendations for the use of contraceptive methods during the postpartum period Mmwr. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 60(26): 878-883
2011: Update to CDC's U.S. Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use, 2010: revised recommendations for the use of contraceptive methods during the postpartum period Mmwr. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 60(26): 878-883
2011: Update to CDC's U.S. Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use, 2010: revised recommendations for the use of contraceptive methods during the postpartum period Mmwr. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 60(26): 878-883
2011: Update to CDC's U.S. Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use, 2010: revised recommendations for the use of contraceptive methods during the postpartum period Mmwr. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 60(26): 878-883
2011: Update to CDC's U.S. Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use, 2010: revised recommendations for the use of contraceptive methods during the postpartum period Mmwr. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 60(26): 878-883
2011: Update to CDC's U.S. Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use, 2010: revised recommendations for the use of contraceptive methods during the postpartum period Mmwr. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 60(26): 878-883
Iyoke, C.; Ezugwu, F.; Lawani, O.; Ugwu, G.; Ajah, L.; Mba, S. 2014: Peer-driven contraceptive choices and preferences for contraceptive methods among students of tertiary educational institutions in Enugu, Nigeria Patient Preference and Adherence 8: 1043-1050
Strasser, J.; Borkowski, L.; Couillard, M.; Allina, A.; Wood, S.F. 2017: Access to Removal of Long-acting Reversible Contraceptive Methods Is an Essential Component of High-Quality Contraceptive Care Women's Health Issues: Official Publication of the Jacobs Institute of Women's Health 27(3): 253-255
Kim, H.Won. 2015: Sex differences in the awareness of emergency contraceptive pills associated with unmarried Korean university students' intention to use contraceptive methods: an online survey Reproductive Health 12: 91
Linet, T.; Levy Bachelot, L.; Farge, G.; Crespi, S.; Yang, J.; Robert, J.; Fabron, C. 2020: PIH7 Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Etonogestrel Contraceptive Implant Compared to SIX other Contraceptive Methods Based on Real Life DATA in France Value in Health 23: S539-S540
Church, K.; Wringe, A.; Fakudze, P.; Kikuvi, J.; Nhlabatsi, Z.; Masuku, R.; Mayhew, S.H.; Abuya, T.; Askew, I.; Birdthistle, I.; Church, K.; Colombini, M.; du-Preez, N.F.; Kikuvi, J.; Kimani, J.; Kivunaga, J.; Mak, J.; Mayhew, S.; Michaels, C.; Mutemwa, R.; Ndigwa, C.; Obure, C.D.; Sweeney, S.; Vassall, A.; Warren, C.; Watts, C.; Zhou, W. 2014: Reliance on condoms for contraceptive protection among HIV care and treatment clients: a mixed methods study on contraceptive choice and motivation within a generalised epidemic Sexually Transmitted Infections 90(5): 394-400