Natural family planning (NFP) methods have served many generations well, and in particular, the symptothermal or symptohormonal methods. The comparison of daily mucus and temperature records for individual cycles with daily hormone measurements, which is now possible, shows that some of the assumptions underlying NFP may not be completely accurate. The various methods are inadvertently depending on an element of chance, which, of course, cannot be known by the NFP user. However, it is statistically inevitable that such errors will result eventually in an unexpected pregnancy, and these discrepancies are the likely reason for the method failures. Further research and integration of home hormone measurements with NFP symptoms are needed.
Summary
Traditional NFP methods, based on the observations of temperature, mucus, and luteinizing hormone, can work well. However, these data are sometimes difficult to interpret, and significant changes in the variables are sometimes "missing" from some cycles. Changes in these variables are elicited by the estrogen and progesterone released from the ovaries. It follows that the direct measures of events in the ovaries are the levels of estrogen and progesterone or their derivatives in blood or urine. Measurements of urinary derivatives of estrogen and progesterone can be used to monitor the ovaries directly and are clearer indicators than traditional NFP methods.
Blackwell Cooke Brown self-monitoring fertility hormones new era natural family planning, urinary estrogen metabolite pregnanediol glucuronide home monitoring compact immunoassay, Ovarian Monitor daily hormone measurement symptohormonal method NFP, quantitative lateral flow immunoassay fertility hormone self-testing technology, at-home fertility hormone monitoring LH estrogen progesterone metabolite measurement, natural family planning technology advancement hormone self-monitoring accuracy, fertility awareness hormonal biomarkers total estrogen PDG daily monitoring, mucus temperature records daily hormone measurements individual cycle correlation, new era NFP smartphone digital hormone reader personalized fertility tracking, Blackwell Linacre Quarterly 2018 home fertility hormone monitoring innovation
PMID 29970935 29970935 DOI 10.1177/0024363918756387 10.1177/0024363918756387
Cite this article
Blackwell, L., Cooke, D., & Brown, S. (2018). Self-Monitoring of Fertility Hormones: A New Era for Natural Family Planning?. The Linacre Quarterly, 85(1), 26-34. https://doi.org/10.1177/0024363918756387
Blackwell L, Cooke D, Brown S. Self-Monitoring of Fertility Hormones: A New Era for Natural Family Planning?. Linacre Q. 2018;85(1):26-34. doi:10.1177/0024363918756387
Blackwell, Leonard, et al. "Self-Monitoring of Fertility Hormones: A New Era for Natural Family Planning?." The Linacre Quarterly, vol. 85, no. 1, 2018, pp. 26-34.
Related articles
Fertility AwarenessEvidence ReviewHormone Monitoring and AppsPostpartum and Perimenopause
A one-day meeting was held as a pre-conference to the Catholic Medical Association Annual Educational event in 2024. A panel of eighteen physicians, scientists, and researchers involved in NFP work was convened to review the available (i) evidence for effectiveness of NFP methods to postpone and achieve pregnancy, (ii) evidence for effectiveness in the postpartum and perimenopause transition periods, (iii) evaluate the current state of technology in NFP (specifically app and quantitative hormone monitoring), and (iv) evidence examining the impact of NFP on marital relations. In each topical area, the panel worked to reach a consensus opinion on the currently available evidence and identified priorities for further research. Results from these discussions and a set of priorities for further work are presented here.
An expert panel was convened to review the current evidence supporting use of NFP in various settings, utilization of new technology, and the impact of NFP on marital dynamics. Results from these discussions and a set of priorities for further work are presented here.
Fertility awareness-based methods (FABMs), also known as natural family planning (NFP), enable couples to identify the days of the menstrual cycle when intercourse may result in pregnancy ("fertile days"), and to avoid intercourse on fertile days if they wish to avoid pregnancy. Thus, these methods are fully dependent on user behavior for effectiveness to avoid pregnancy. For couples and clinicians considering the use of an FABM, one important metric to consider is the highest expected effectiveness (lowest possible pregnancy rate) during the correct use of the method to avoid pregnancy. To assess this, most studies of FABMs have reported a method-related pregnancy rate (a cumulative proportion), which is calculated based on all cycles (or months) in the study. In contrast, the correct use to avoid pregnancy rate (also a cumulative proportion) has the denominator of cycles with the correct use of the FABM to avoid pregnancy. The relationship between these measures has not been evaluated quantitatively. We conducted a series of simulations demonstrating that the method-related pregnancy rate is artificially decreased in direct proportion to the proportion of cycles with intermediate use (any use other than correct use to avoid or targeted use to conceive), which also increases the total pregnancy rate. Thus, as the total pregnancy rate rises (related to intermediate use), the method-related pregnancy rate falls artificially while the correct use pregnancy rate remains constant. For practical application, we propose the core elements needed to assess correct use cycles in FABM studies.
Fertility awareness-based methods (FABMs) can be used by couples to avoid pregnancy, by avoiding intercourse on fertile days. Users want to know what the highest effectiveness (lowest pregnancy rate) would be if they use an FABM correctly and consistently to avoid pregnancy. In this simulation study, we (1) the method-related pregnancy rate; and (2) the correct use pregnancy rate. We show that the method-related pregnancy rate is biased too low if some users in the study are not using the method consistently to avoid pregnancy, while the correct use pregnancy rate obtains an accurate estimate. In FABM studies, the method-related pregnancy rate is biased too low, but the correct use pregnancy rate is unbiased.
The uses of cervical mucus and basal body temperature as indicators of return to fertility postpartum have resulted in high unintended pregnancy rates. In 2013, a study found that when women used urine hormone signs in a postpartum/breastfeeding protocol this resulted in fewer pregnancies. To improve the original protocol's effectiveness, (1) women were to increase the number of days tested with the Clearblue Fertility Monitor, (2) an optional second luteinizing hormone test could be done in the evening, and (3) instructions were given to manage the beginning of the fertile window for the first six cycles postpartum. The purpose of this study was to determine the correct and typical use effectiveness rates to avoid pregnancy in women who used a revised postpartum/breastfeeding protocol. A cohort review of an established data set from 207 postpartum breastfeeding women who used the protocol to avoid pregnancy was completed using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. Total pregnancy rates that included correct and incorrect use pregnancies were eighteen per one hundred women over twelve cycles of use. For the pregnancies that met a priori criteria, the correct use pregnancy rates were two per one hundred over twelve months and twelve cycles of use and typical use rates were four per one hundred women at twelve cycles of use. The protocol had fewer unplanned pregnancies than the original, however, the cost of the method increased.
This pilot qualitative case study was able to elicit rich data enabling a description of how women went through the journey of achieving pregnancy using fertility awareness-based methods. Findings underscore that women preferred using natural ways to detect ovulation and would recommend other women to do so, but with healthcare providers' guidance. The findings of this case study can serve as a starting point to provide a framework to understand women's experiences of enduring trial and error with multiple fertility awareness-based methods before discovering their effective method. Findings emphasize the importance for healthcare providers to guide women in using fertility awareness-based methods.