SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2003
Immediate post-partum insertion of intrauterine devices.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Copper containing intra-uterine devices versus depot progestogens for contraception.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2010Pooled it
- Postplacental or delayed insertion of the levonorgestrel intrauterine device after vaginal delivery: a randomized controlled trial.Obstetrics and gynecology · 2010Trial
- A one-year cohort study of complications, continuation, and failure rates of postpartum TCu380A in Tanzania.Reproductive health · 2020Article
- Evaluating the Implementation of an Intervention to Improve Postpartum Contraception in Tanzania: A Qualitative Study of Provider and Client Perspectives.Global health, science and practice · 2020Article
- Post-placental Intrauterine Device Insertion Versus Delayed Intrauterine Device Insertion: An Observational Study.Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology of India · 2020Article
- Immediate Postpartum Intrauterine Contraceptive Device Insertions in Caesarean and Vaginal Deliveries: A Comparative Study of Follow-Up Outcomes.International journal of reproductive medicine · 2016Article
- Intrauterine device quo vadis? Why intrauterine device use should be revisited particularly in nulliparous women?Open access journal of contraception · 2015Article
- Bridging the gaps between research, policy and practice in low- and middle-income countries: a survey of health care providers.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2010Article
- Bridging the gaps among research, policy and practice in ten low- and middle-income countries: development and testing of a questionnaire for researchers.Health research policy and systems · 2010Article
- Barriers to contraceptive use in product labeling and practice guidelines.American journal of public health · 2006Article
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
- Update of
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInsertion of an intrauterine device (IUD) immediately after delivery is appealing for several reasons. The woman is known not to be pregnant, her motivation for contraception may be high and the setting may be convenient for both the woman and her provider. However, the risk of spontaneous expulsion may be unacceptably high.
objectivesTo assess the efficacy and feasibility of IUD insertion immediately after expulsion of the placenta. Our a priori hypothesis was that this practice is safe but associated with higher expulsion rates than interval IUD insertion. SEARCH STRATEGY: We used MEDLINE, Popline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Controlled Trials Register computer searches, supplemented by review articles and contact with investigators. SELECTION CRITERIA: We sought all randomized controlled trials that had at least one treatment arm that involved immediate post-partum (within ten minutes of placental expulsion) insertion of an IUD. Comparisons could include different IUDs, different insertion techniques, immediate vs. delayed post-partum insertion, or immediate vs. interval insertion (unrelated to pregnancy). Studies could include either vaginal or cesarean deliveries. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We evaluated the methodological quality of each report and sought to identify duplicate reporting of data from multicenter trials. We abstracted data onto data collection forms. Principal outcome measures included pregnancy, expulsion, and continuation rates. Because the trials did not have uniform interventions, we were unable to aggregate them in a meta-analysis. MAIN
resultsWe found no randomized controlled trials that directly compared immediate post-partum insertion with either delayed post-partum or interval insertion. Modifications of existing devices, such as adding absorbable sutures or additional appendages, did not appear beneficial. Most studies showed no important differences between insertions done by hand or by instruments. Lippes Loops and Progestasert devices did not perform as well as did copper devices. REVIEWER'S
conclusionsImmediate post-partum insertion of IUDs appeared safe and effective, though direct comparisons with other insertion times were lacking. Advantages of immediate post-partum insertion include high motivation, assurance that the woman is not pregnant, and convenience. However, expulsion rates appear to be higher than with interval insertion. The popularity of immediate post-partum IUD insertion in countries as diverse as China, Mexico, and Egypt support the feasibility of this approach. Early follow-up may be important in identifying spontaneous IUD expulsions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
12535449What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.