From Surf Wiki (app.surf) — the open knowledge base

Creighton Model FertilityCare System

Natural family planning method

Field	Value
name	Creighton Model / FertilityCare
bc_type	Behavioral
date_first_use	1980
rate_type	Failure
perfect_failure%	0.5
perfect_failure_ref
typical_failure%	3.2
typical_failure_ref
reversibility	Immediate
user_reminders	Accurate instruction & daily charting are key.
clinic_interval	None
STD_protection_YesNo	No
periods_advantage	Prediction
benefits	Low direct cost;
no side effects;
in accord with Catholic teachings;
may be used to aid pregnancy achievement
weight_gain_YesNo	No

|perfect_failure% = 0.5 |typical_failure% = 3.2 no side effects; in accord with Catholic teachings; may be used to aid pregnancy achievement The Creighton Model FertilityCare System (Creighton Model, FertilityCare, CrMS) is a form of natural family planning which involves identifying the fertile period during a woman's menstrual cycle. The Creighton Model was developed by Thomas Hilgers, the founder and director of the Pope Paul VI Institute. This model, like the Billings ovulation method, is based on observations of cervical mucus to track fertility. Creighton can be used for both avoiding pregnancy and achieving pregnancy.

Conceptual basis

Hilgers describes the Creighton Model as being based on "a standardized modification of the Billings ovulation method (BOM)", which was developed by John and Evelyn Billings in the 1960s. The Billingses issued a paper refuting the claim that the CrMS represents a standardization of the BOM. According to the Billingses said that those concepts are two different methods and should not be seen as interchangeable.

Effectiveness

For avoiding pregnancy, the perfect-use failure rate of Creighton was 0.5%, which means that for each year that 1,000 couples using this method perfectly, that there are 5 unintended pregnancies. The typical-use failure rate, representing the fraction of couples using this method that actually had an unintended pregnancy, is reported as 3.2%.

For achieving pregnancy, no large clinical trials have been performed comparing ART and NaProTechnology. Only observational one-arm studies have been published so far. In the larger of these three studies, 75% of couples trying to conceive received additional hormonal stimulation such as clomiphene.

References

(1998). "Creighton Model NaProEducation Technology for avoiding pregnancy. Use effectiveness.". The Journal of Reproductive Medicine.
[http://www.creightonmodel.com/ Creighton Model]
[http://www.woomb.org/omrrca/BOMvCrMS.pdf Some Clarifications Concerning NaProTECHNOLOGY and the Billings Ovulation Method] {{webarchive. link. (2007-09-28)
(2009). "Fertility Awareness-Based Methods: Another Option for Family Planning". The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine.
(2008). "Outcomes From Treatment of Infertility With Natural Procreative Technology in an Irish General Practice". The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine.
(2012). "Natural procreative technology for infertility and recurrent miscarriage: outcomes in a Canadian family practice". Canadian Family Physician.
(2021). ""Restorative reproductive medicine for infertility in two family medicine clinics in New England, an observational study"". BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth.

Info: Wikipedia Source

This article was imported from Wikipedia and is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Content has been adapted to SurfDoc format. Original contributors can be found on the article history page.

fertility-awareness

Want to explore this topic further?

Ask Mako anything about Creighton Model FertilityCare System — get instant answers, deeper analysis, and related topics.

Research with Mako

Free with your Surf account

Content sourced from Wikipedia, available under CC BY-SA 4.0.

This content may have been generated or modified by AI. CloudSurf Software LLC is not responsible for the accuracy, completeness, or reliability of AI-generated content. Always verify important information from primary sources.

Report