Modern fertility awareness-based methods (FABMs) of family planning have been offered as alternative methods of family planning. Billings Ovulation Method, the Creighton Model, and the Symptothermal Method are the more widely used FABMs and can be more narrowly defined as natural family planning. The first 2 methods are based on the examination of cervical secretions to assess fertility. The Symptothermal Method combines characteristics of cervical secretions, basal body temperature, and historical cycle data to determine fertility. FABMs also include the more recently developed Standard Days Method and TwoDays Method. All are distinct from the more traditional rhythm and basal body temperature methods alone. Although these older methods are not highly effective, modern FABMs have typical-use unintended pregnancy rates of 1% to 3% in both industrialized and nonindustrialized nations. Studies suggest that in the United States physician knowledge of FABMs is frequently incomplete. We review the available evidence about the effectiveness for preventing unintended pregnancy, prognostic social demographics of users of the methods, and social outcomes related to FABMs, all of which suggest that family physicians can offer modern FABMs as effective means of family planning. We also provide suggestions about useful educational and instructional resources for family physicians and their patients.
fertility awareness based methods family planning review effectiveness, Billings ovulation method Creighton model symptothermal comparison, modern natural family planning typical use pregnancy rates, Pallone Bergus fertility awareness family medicine review, Standard Days Method TwoDay Method family planning, physician knowledge fertility awareness methods survey, NFP effectiveness industrialized nonindustrialized nations, cervical mucus basal body temperature family planning methods, family physician education natural family planning resources, fertility awareness methods versus rhythm method effectiveness
PMID 19264938 19264938 DOI 10.3122/jabfm.2009.02.080038 10.3122/jabfm.2009.02.080038
Cite this article
Pallone, S. R., & Bergus, G. R. (2009). Fertility awareness-based methods: another option for family planning. Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM, 22(2), 147-157. https://doi.org/10.3122/jabfm.2009.02.080038
Pallone SR, Bergus GR. Fertility awareness-based methods: another option for family planning. J Am Board Fam Med. 2009;22(2):147-157. doi:10.3122/jabfm.2009.02.080038
Pallone, Stephen R., and George R. Bergus. "Fertility awareness-based methods: another option for family planning." Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM, vol. 22, no. 2, 2009, pp. 147-157.
Keywords
Female, Fertility/physiology, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Humans, Natural Family Planning Methods/methods, Pregnancy, Unplanned, United States
To explore the relationship between the type of clinician (generalist vs subspecialist) initially seen by infertile women, the treatment received, and the time to pregnancy. We analyzed mixed-mode questionnaire data from 867 women with primary infertility enrolled into a retrospective cohort through population- and fertility clinic-based sampling. We compared women presenting first to generalist providers with women presenting first to fertility subspecialists, with the main outcomes of receiving in vitro fertilization (IVF), time to pregnancy, and live birth. The first contact for most (84%) women with infertility was a generalist provider. Only 8% of women sought care first from a fertility subspecialist, and these women were older and had been trying longer to conceive. Women who presented first to a generalist provider were less likely to receive IVF (adjusted odds ratio, 0.48; 95% confidence interval, 0.28-0.82), were equally likely to achieve pregnancy, and had similar times to pregnancy (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.11; 95% confidence interval, 0.80-1.53) compared with women who presented first to a subspecialist. Generalist providers are frequently the first point of care for women with difficulty conceiving and are uniquely positioned to promote the balanced management of infertility.
In recent years there has been an explosion in the development of medical apps, with more than 40,000 apps now available. Nearly 100 apps allow women to track their fertility and menstrual cycles and can be used to avoid or achieve pregnancy. Apps offer a convenient way to track fertility biomarkers. However, only some use evidence-based fertility awareness-based methods (FABMs), which with ideal use have rates of effectiveness similar to those of commonly used forms of hormonal birth control. Since having a baby or preventing a pregnancy are important responsibilities, it is critical that women and couples have access to reliable, evidence-based apps that allow them to accurately track their fertility. We developed a tool to evaluate and rate fertility apps. This tool is specifically designed to help couples avoid pregnancy. Results showed that the majority of fertility apps are not based on evidence-based FABMs or include a disclaimer discouraging use for avoiding pregnancy. However, at least 1 app in each FABM category (except symptohormonal methods) had a perfect score on accuracy. Relying solely on an app to use an FABM, without appropriate training in the method, may not be sufficient to prevent pregnancy.
Fertility AwarenessOvulation Predictor KitsAdjunct Tools for Cycle MonitoringCrossover Design
Difficult clinical signs such as confusing cervical mucus or erratic basal body temperature can make the use of fertility awareness methods (FAMs) difficult in some cases. The goal of this study was to assess the feasibility of using a cheap urinary luteinizing hormone (LH)-surge identification kit as an adjunct to identify the infertile phase after ovulation when facing these scenarios. The study used a block-allocation, crossover, 2-arm methodology (LH kit/FAM vs FAM only). Comparison of the 2 arms was done with regard to the accuracy of identification (yes/no) of the luteal phase in each cycle as confirmed by serum progesterone concentrations. We recruited 23 Canadian women currently using FAM, aged 18 to 48 years, who have had menstrual cycles 25 to 35 days long for the past 3 months and perceive themselves to have difficulty with identifying the infertile phase after ovulation. LH kits identified 100% of the luteal phases, whereas FAM indentified 87% (statistically significant). In those identified cycles, LH kits provided a mean of 10.3 days of infertility, and FAM only provided 10 days of infertility (not statistically significant). Among this population, LH kits may offer an adjunct for women who may wish to have an additional double-check. However, there are still clinical circumstances when even an LH kit does not provide confirmation. More research in this area is encouraged.
Fertility AwarenessPostpartum ProtocolsReturn of FertilityPregnancy Avoidance Rates
The postpartum period is a challenging time for family planning, especially for women who breastfeed. Breastfeeding delays the return of menses (lactational amenorrhea), but ovulation often occurs before first menses. For this reason, a protocol was developed to assist women in identifying their return of fertility postpartum to avoid pregnancy. In this prospective, 12-month, longitudinal cohort study, 198 postpartum women aged 20 to 45 years (mean age, 30.2 years) were taught a protocol for avoiding pregnancy with either online or in-person instruction. A hand-held fertility monitor was used to identify the fertile period by testing for urinary changes in estrogen and luteinizing hormone, and the results were tracked on a web site. During lactational amenorrhea, urine testing was done in 20-day intervals. When menses returned, the monitor was reset at the onset of each new menstrual cycle. Participants were instructed to avoid intercourse during the identified fertile period. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used to calculate unintentional pregnancy rates through the first 12 months postpartum. There were 8 unintended pregnancies per 100 women at 12 months postpartum. With correct use, there were 2 unintended pregnancies per 100 women at 12 months. The online postpartum protocol may effectively assist a select group of women in avoiding pregnancy during the transition to regular menstrual cycles.