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.
Methods
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.
Results
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).
Conclusions
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.
ovulation predictor kit fertility awareness method adjunct, LH surge urinary kit natural family planning, fertility awareness method difficult cervical mucus signs, Leiva ovulation predictor kit FAM pilot study, luteinizing hormone kit luteal phase identification, erratic basal body temperature fertility awareness adjunct, crossover study LH kit vs FAM serum progesterone, infertile phase confirmation ovulation predictor kit, Fehring fertility awareness LH kit adjunct, urinary LH kit confirm ovulation natural family planning
PMID 24808123 24808123 DOI 10.3122/jabfm.2014.03.130255 10.3122/jabfm.2014.03.130255
Cite this article
Leiva, R., Burhan, U., Kyrillos, E., Fehring, R., McLaren, R., Dalzell, C., & Tanguay, E. (2014). Use of ovulation predictor kits as adjuncts when using fertility awareness methods (FAMs): a pilot study. *Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM*, *27*(3), 427-429. https://doi.org/10.3122/jabfm.2014.03.130255
Leiva R, Burhan U, Kyrillos E, Fehring R, McLaren R, Dalzell C, et al. Use of ovulation predictor kits as adjuncts when using fertility awareness methods (FAMs): a pilot study. J Am Board Fam Med. 2014;27(3):427-429. doi:10.3122/jabfm.2014.03.130255
Leiva, R., et al. "Use of ovulation predictor kits as adjuncts when using fertility awareness methods (FAMs): a pilot study." *Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM*, vol. 27, no. 3, 2014, pp. 427-429.
Boltz MW et al., 2017Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM
PURPOSE: 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.
METHODS: We anal...
Duane M et al., 2016Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM
Introduction: 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 menstru...
Bouchard T et al., 2013Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM
INTRODUCTION: 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 of...
Pallone SR et al., 2009Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM
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 M...