Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24489754›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2014

Adverse events profile of PrePex a non-surgical device for adult male circumcision in a Ugandan urban setting.

Moses Galukande, Kevin Duffy, Jean Paul Bitega, Sam Rackara, Denis Sekavuga Bbaale, Florence Nakaggwa, Teddy Nagaddya, Nick Wooding, Monica Dea, Alex Coutinho

Abstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Ockham's Razor and the PrePex Male Circumcision Device.The Journal of infectious diseases · 2016
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Innovative Methods of Male Circumcision for HIV Prevention-Getting the Right Evidence.Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999) · 2016
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Moses GalukandeInternational Hospital Kampala, Kampala, Uganda ; Surgery Department, Mulago Hospital, Kampala, Uganda.
Kevin DuffyInternational Medical Group, Kampala, Uganda.
Jean Paul BitegaKanombe Hospital, Kigali, Rwanda.
Sam RackaraInternational Hospital Kampala, Kampala, Uganda.
Denis Sekavuga BbaaleInfectious Diseases Institute, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda.
Florence NakaggwaInternational Health Sciences University, Kampala, Uganda.
Teddy NagaddyaInternational Health Sciences University, Kampala, Uganda.
Nick WoodingInternational Health Sciences University, Kampala, Uganda.
Monica DeaCentre of Disease Control, Kampala, Uganda.
Alex CoutinhoInfectious Diseases Institute, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSafe Male Circumcision is a proven approach for partial HIV prevention. Several sub Saharan African countries have plans to reach a prevalence of 80% of their adult males circumcised by 2015. These targets require out of ordinary organization, demand creation, timely execution and perhaps the use of SMC devices.

objectiveTo profile Adverse Events rate and acceptance of PrePex, a non surgical device for adult male circumcision.

methodsA prospective study, conducted at International Hospital Kampala, Uganda, between August and October 2012. Ethical approval was obtained from Uganda National Council of Science and Technology.

resultsOf 1,040 men received to undergo SMC, 678 opted for PrePex, 36 were excluded at an initial physical examination screening. 642 were enrolled and consented, and another 17 were excluded before device placement. 625 underwent the procedure. Average age was 24 years (± 7). Twelve moderate AEs occurred among 10 participants 12/625, (1.9%). These were all reversible. Five had device displacement, one had an everted foreskin; five had bleeding after the device was removed and one had voiding difficulties. The majority (279 out of 300) of men interviewed complained of some pain within the week of placement. Mean pain score at device placement (using visual analogue scale) was 0.5, at device removal 4.5 and within 2 min of removal the pain score was 1.4. Over 70% of the devices were placed and removed by non-physician clinicians. Presented with a choice, 60% of men chose PrePex over surgical SMC. Close to 90% would recommend the device to their friends. Odour from the necrotic skin was a concern. Removals done 1-2 days earlier than day 7 were beneficial and conferred no extra risk.

conclusionAEs of a moderate or severe nature associated with PrePex were low and reversible. PrePex is feasible for mass safe male circumcision scaling up.

Indexed as

CitiesAdolescentAdultCircumcision, MaleEquipment and SuppliesHumansMaleMiddle AgedUgandaYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID24489754
PMCPMC3904949

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.