SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2015
Immediate postpartum insertion of intrauterine device for contraception.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 61 papers, 11 of them syntheses 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.
Comparative of Two Devices (Conventional Intrauterine Devices (Cu T380 A)/Frameless Intrauterine Devices (GyneFix)) for Postpartum Immediate Contraception in Cesarean Deliveries
Clinical Outcomes of Post-placental Insertion of Cupper T380A and Multiload 375 Contraceptive Devices During Cesarean Section
Who cites it
61 citing papers in PubMed, 11 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 167 citations in OpenAlex.
- Immediate Versus Delayed Postpartum and Postabortion Insertion of Long-Acting Reversible Contraception: An Umbrella Review.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2026Pooled it
- FIGO position statement on postpartum intrauterine devices (PPIUD).International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025Guideline
- Immediate and delayed placement of the intrauterine device after abortion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2024Pooled it
- Utilisation, effectiveness, and safety of immediate postpartum intrauterine device insertion: a systematic literature review.BMJ sexual & reproductive health · 2023Pooled it
- Immediate versus delayed postpartum insertion of contraceptive implant and IUD for contraception.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device (LNG-IUD) for symptomatic endometriosis following surgery.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Systematic review on use of health incentives in U.S. to change maternal health behavior.Preventive medicine · 2021Pooled it
- Intrauterine Device Expulsion After Postpartum Placement: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Obstetrics and gynecology · 2018Pooled it
- Provider and lay perspectives on intra-uterine contraception: a global review.Reproductive health · 2017Pooled it
- Immediate versus delayed postpartum insertion of contraceptive implant for contraception.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- The safety of intrauterine devices in breastfeeding women: a systematic review.Contraception · 2016Pooled it
- Effectiveness, safety and overall satisfaction of early postpartum placement of hormonal IUD compared with standard procedure: An open-label, randomized, multicenter study.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2022Trial
- Integrating postpartum contraceptive counseling and IUD insertion services into maternity care in Nepal: results from stepped-wedge randomized controlled trial.Reproductive health · 2019Trial
- Delivering postpartum family planning services in Nepal: are providers supportive?BMC health services research · 2018Trial
- Comparison of an additional early visit to routine postpartum care on initiation of long-acting reversible contraception: A randomized trial.Contraception · 2018Trial
- Laparoscopic management of an intramurally migrated intrauterine contraceptive device (IUCD) without serosal perforation: a case report.International journal of surgery case reports · 2026Article
- Post-pregnancy contraception.Reproduction & fertility · 2026Review
- Use of copper intrauterine devices in the immediate postpartum period: a prospective longitudinal study.Revista brasileira de enfermagem · 2026Article
- Acceptability and utilization of modern contraceptives and associated factors among childbearing-aged women in Northern Ghana: a cross-sectional study.Contraception and reproductive medicine · 2025Article
- One-year continuation of postpartum intrauterine contraceptive device: Findings from a prospective cohort study in India.PloS one · 2024Article
1 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWomen who want to start intrauterine contraception (IUC) during the postpartum period might benefit from IUC insertion immediately after delivery. Postplacental insertion greatly reduces the risk of subsequent pregnancy and eliminates the need for a return visit to start contraception. Without the option of immediate insertion, many women may never return for services or may adopt less effective contraception.
objectivesOur aim was to examine the outcomes of IUC insertion immediately after placenta delivery (within 10 minutes), especially when compared with insertion at other postpartum times. We focused on successful IUC placement (insertion), subsequent expulsion, and method use. SEARCH
methodsWe searched for trials until 1 April 2015. Sources included PubMed (MEDLINE), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), POPLINE, Web of Science, EMBASE, LILACS, ClinicalTrials.gov, and ICTRP. For the original review, the authors contacted investigators to identify other trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: We sought randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with at least one treatment arm that involved immediate IUC placement (i.e., within 10 minutes of placenta delivery). Comparison arms could have included early postpartum insertion (from 10 minutes postplacental to hospital discharge) or standard insertion (during a postpartum visit). Trials could also have compared different IUC methods or insertion techniques. Delivery may have been vaginal or cesarean. Primary outcomes were placement (insertion), subsequent expulsion, and method use at study assessment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: For dichotomous outcomes, we used the Mantel-Haenszel odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Earlier studies primarily reported results as life-table rates. We aggregated trials in a meta-analysis if they had similar interventions and outcome measures. A sensitivity analysis included studies with moderate or high quality evidence and sufficient outcome data. MAIN
resultsWe included 15 trials. Seven studies reported from 2010 to 2014 were added to eight from the original 2001 review. Newer trials compared immediate postplacental insertion versus early (10 minutes to 48 hours) or standard insertion (during the postpartum visit). Of four with full reports, three were small trials. The other three studies had conference abstracts. The eight early trials examined immediate insertion of different devices or insertion techniques. Most studies were published in the 1980s, some with limited reporting.Our sensitivity analysis included trials with sufficient outcome data and moderate or high quality evidence. Four newer trials comparing insertion times met the inclusion criteria. Two studies used the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) after vaginal delivery. The other two trials placed IUC after cesarean section; one used the CuT 380A intrauterine device (IUD) and the other used the LNG-IUS.A pilot trial compared immediate insertion versus early or standard insertion. In groups comparing immediate versus early insertion (N = 30), all women had the LNG-IUS inserted. By six months, the groups had the same expulsion rate and did not differ significantly in IUC use.For immediate versus standard insertion, we conducted meta-analyses of four trials. Insertion rates did not differ significantly between study arms. However, the trial from Uganda showed insertion was more likely for the immediate group, although the estimate was imprecise. In the meta-analysis, expulsion by six months was more likely for the immediate group, but the confidence interval was wide (OR 4.89, 95% CI 1.47 to 16.32; participants = 210; studies = 4). IUC use at six months was more likely with immediate insertion than with standard insertion (OR 2.04, 95% CI 1.01 to 4.09; participants = 243; studies = 4). Study arms did not differ in use at 3 or 12 months in individual small trials. AUTHORS'
conclusionsRecent trials compared different insertion times after vaginal or cesarean delivery. Evidence was limited because studies with full reports generally had small sample sizes. Overall, the quality of evidence was moderate; abstracts and older studies had limited reporting. Ongoing trials will add to the evidence, although some are small. Trials of adequate power are needed to estimate expulsion rates and side effects.The benefit of effective contraception immediately after delivery may outweigh the disadvantage of increased risk for expulsion. Frequent prenatal visits during the third trimester provide the opportunity to discuss effective contraceptive methods and desired timing for initiation. Clinical follow-up can help detect early expulsion, as can educating women about expulsion signs and symptoms.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.