Billings ovulation method

Last updated

Billings ovulation method
Background
TypeBehavioral
First usedeveloped in 1950s
Failure rates (first year)
Perfect use0.5–3 [1] [2] %
Typical use1–22 [1] %
Usage
Reversibilityimmediate
User remindersAccurate teaching and daily charting are essential.
Clinic reviewNone
Advantages and disadvantages
STI protectionNo
Period advantagesPrediction
Weight gainNo
BenefitsLow cost, no prerequisites for use, no side effects, can aid pregnancy achievement
RisksEffectiveness is unclear

The Billings ovulation method is a method in which women use their vaginal mucus to determine their fertility. [3] It does not rely on the presence of ovulation, but identifies patterns of potential and obvious infertility within the cycle. Its effectiveness is not very clear. [3]

Contents

Evidence

Typical use of this method is associated with a pregnancy rate of 1-22%. [1] A World Health Organization study found that 15% is caused by a conscious departure from method rules. [1] The percentage of people who stop using the method after a year is 1–24%. [1] Perfect use has been estimated to result in pregnancy in 0.5–3%. [1] [2] Some studies of perfect use excluded those who could not detect secretions that represented fertility. [1]

Fertility

An observation chart Billings Ovulation Method - Observation Chart - en.svg
An observation chart
Cervical mucus Cervical mucus1.jpg
Cervical mucus

Function

In the days leading up to ovulation, the cervix responds to estrogen by producing mucus capable of sustaining sperm survival. This mucus leaves the vagina as the woman is in an upright position. The mucus is observed through the sensation at the vulva and by looking at any cervical secretions. Daily charting of these observations will reveal either an unchanging pattern indicating infertility or a changing pattern of sensation and discharge indicating fertility. Both of these patterns follow the hormonal patterns which control sperm survival and conception. [8]

History

The first recorded observations of the relationship between cervical mucus and survival of spermatozoa come from the mid-19th century. The topic was not systematically studied, however, for almost another century. In 1948, Erik Odeblad was studying mycoplasms in the female genital tract. During the course of his studies, he noticed that cervical mucus changed in a predictable pattern through the course of a woman's cycle. He continued his study of the cervix. [9]

John Billings (19182007) was involved with the development of the Billings ovulation method. [10]

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Pallone, SR; Bergus, GR (2009). "Fertility awareness-based methods: another option for family planning". Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine. 22 (2): 147–57. doi: 10.3122/jabfm.2009.02.080038 . PMID   19264938.
  2. 1 2 Hatcher, Robert Anthony; M.D, Anita L. Nelson (2007). Contraceptive Technology. Ardent Media. p. 345. ISBN   9781597080019.
  3. 1 2 Poston, Dudley L. Jr.; Bouvier, Leon F. (2010). Population and Society: An Introduction to Demography. Cambridge University Press. p. 91. ISBN   9781139489386.
  4. "Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS)". RCOG. Retrieved August 10, 2025.
  5. Hospital, The Royal Women's. "Ovulation and conception". The Royal Women's Hospital. Retrieved August 11, 2025.
  6. Kippley, John; Sheila Kippley (1996). The Art of Natural Family Planning (4th ed.). Cincinnati, OH: The Couple to Couple League. p. 88. ISBN   978-0-926412-13-2.
  7. China Successfully Launching Billings Method Archived December 30, 2006, at the Wayback Machine : Dr. Shao-Zhen Qian
  8. Teaching the Billings Ovulation Method, Dr E. L. Billings AM, MB BS, DCH (London), 2001.
  9. Odeblad, Erik (1994). "The Discovery of Different Types of Cervical Mucus". Bulletin of the Ovulation Method Research and Reference Centre of Australia. 21 (3): 3–35. Archived from the original on December 20, 2005. Retrieved October 19, 2006.
  10. Billings, J (2002). "THE QUEST - leading to the discovery of the Billings Ovulation Method". Bulletin of Ovulation Method Research and Reference Centre of Australia. 29 (1): 18–28. Archived from the original on February 19, 2007.