Non-pharmacologic techniques for interval intrauterine device placement: a systematic review.

IF 3.2 3区 医学 Q1 FAMILY STUDIES
Tesfaye Tufa, Emily Snyder, Sophia Garbarino, Mekdes Wolderufael, Petrus Schonken Steyn
{"title":"Non-pharmacologic techniques for interval intrauterine device placement: a systematic review.","authors":"Tesfaye Tufa, Emily Snyder, Sophia Garbarino, Mekdes Wolderufael, Petrus Schonken Steyn","doi":"10.1136/bmjsrh-2025-202840","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To systematically review the evidence on the effectiveness of non-pharmacologic techniques for interval intrauterine device (IUD) placement.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched various databases from database inception to 15 December 2023 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) examining non-pharmacologic techniques for IUD placement compared with placebo or pharmacologic techniques. Outcomes of interest were pain experienced with IUD placement, provider ease of placement, need for adjunctive placement measures, placement success, patient satisfaction, side effects and adverse events. We extracted data from included articles, assessed risk of bias, and determined certainty of evidence for all outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eleven RCTs met the inclusion criteria, examining 10 different non-pharmacologic techniques. The risk of bias was high in 10 trials and low in 1 trial. Of 11 RCTs that examined patient pain, two found reduced pain with the Valsalva breathing technique (where women inhaled deeply and held their breath during IUD placement), without tenaculum placement compared with routine care (i.e., use of a tenaculum) (OR 0.04; 95% CI 0.01 to 0.15) or acupuncture compared with routine care (mean difference -1.88; 95% CI -2.72 to -1.04). None of the four trials that assessed ease of IUD placement found differences between study groups. Across nine RCTs, most had high rates of placement success. One study each examined need for cervical dilation and patient satisfaction; the findings were similar between study groups. Overall, few side effects and no adverse events were reported across the studies.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Non-pharmacologic techniques like the Valsalva manoeuvre and acupuncture may reduce patient pain with IUD placement (certainty of evidence ranging from moderate to low). However, evidence is limited, and more high-quality trials with larger sample sizes are needed.</p><p><strong>Prospero registration number: </strong>CRD42024507788.</p>","PeriodicalId":9219,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Sexual & Reproductive Health","volume":"51 Suppl 1","pages":"s38-s51"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-11-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12703282/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Sexual & Reproductive Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjsrh-2025-202840","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"FAMILY STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To systematically review the evidence on the effectiveness of non-pharmacologic techniques for interval intrauterine device (IUD) placement.

Methods: We searched various databases from database inception to 15 December 2023 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) examining non-pharmacologic techniques for IUD placement compared with placebo or pharmacologic techniques. Outcomes of interest were pain experienced with IUD placement, provider ease of placement, need for adjunctive placement measures, placement success, patient satisfaction, side effects and adverse events. We extracted data from included articles, assessed risk of bias, and determined certainty of evidence for all outcomes.

Results: Eleven RCTs met the inclusion criteria, examining 10 different non-pharmacologic techniques. The risk of bias was high in 10 trials and low in 1 trial. Of 11 RCTs that examined patient pain, two found reduced pain with the Valsalva breathing technique (where women inhaled deeply and held their breath during IUD placement), without tenaculum placement compared with routine care (i.e., use of a tenaculum) (OR 0.04; 95% CI 0.01 to 0.15) or acupuncture compared with routine care (mean difference -1.88; 95% CI -2.72 to -1.04). None of the four trials that assessed ease of IUD placement found differences between study groups. Across nine RCTs, most had high rates of placement success. One study each examined need for cervical dilation and patient satisfaction; the findings were similar between study groups. Overall, few side effects and no adverse events were reported across the studies.

Conclusions: Non-pharmacologic techniques like the Valsalva manoeuvre and acupuncture may reduce patient pain with IUD placement (certainty of evidence ranging from moderate to low). However, evidence is limited, and more high-quality trials with larger sample sizes are needed.

Prospero registration number: CRD42024507788.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

间隔宫内节育器放置的非药物技术:系统回顾。
目的:系统回顾非药物技术在间隔宫内节育器(IUD)放置中的有效性。方法:我们检索了从数据库建立到2023年12月15日的各种数据库,以比较非药物技术与安慰剂或药物技术放置宫内节育器的随机对照试验(rct)。关注的结果是放置宫内节育器时经历的疼痛、提供者是否容易放置、是否需要辅助放置措施、放置成功、患者满意度、副作用和不良事件。我们从纳入的文章中提取数据,评估偏倚风险,并确定所有结果的证据确定性。结果:11项rct符合纳入标准,检查了10种不同的非药物技术。10项试验偏倚风险高,1项试验偏倚风险低。在11项检查患者疼痛的随机对照试验中,有两项发现,与常规护理(即使用肌腱)相比,使用Valsalva呼吸技术(女性在放置宫内节育器时深吸并屏住呼吸)、不放置肌腱(OR 0.04; 95% CI 0.01至0.15)或针灸(平均差异-1.88;95% CI -2.72至-1.04)减轻了疼痛。四项评估宫内节育器放置难易程度的试验均未发现研究组之间的差异。在9个随机对照试验中,大多数都有很高的安置成功率。各有一项研究调查了宫颈扩张的需求和患者满意度;研究小组之间的结果相似。总的来说,研究中几乎没有副作用和不良事件的报道。结论:非药物技术,如Valsalva手法和针灸可以减轻患者放置宫内节育器的疼痛(证据的确定性从中等到低)。然而,证据有限,需要更多大样本量的高质量试验。普洛斯彼罗注册号:CRD42024507788。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMJ Sexual & Reproductive Health
BMJ Sexual & Reproductive Health Medicine-Reproductive Medicine
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
6.10%
发文量
38
期刊介绍: BMJ Sexual & Reproductive Health is a multiprofessional journal that promotes sexual and reproductive health and wellbeing, and best contraceptive practice, worldwide. It publishes research, debate and comment to inform policy and practice, and recognises the importance of professional-patient partnership.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书