SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2015
Interventions for pain with intrauterine device insertion.
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 5 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 36 papers, 5 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.
Lidocaine for Pain Control During Intrauterine Device Insertion: A Randomized Clinical Trial
Effect of Adding Vaginal Isosorbide Mononitrate to Misoprostol Prior to Intrauterine Device Insertion in Women Delivered Only by Elective Cesarean Section: a Randomized Double-blind Controlled Clinical Trial
Does LI4 Acupuncture Provide an Effective Analgesia During Intrauterine Device
Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS) for Intrauterine Device (IUD) Pain
Transvaginal Three-Dimensional Ultrasound in the Evaluation of Intrauterine Device Placement Six Weeks After Insertion: A Cross-Sectional Study
Who cites it
36 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 226 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Effectiveness of Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs for Pain Relief During Outpatient Intrauterine Device Insertion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.The Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology · 2026Pooled it
- Non-pharmacologic techniques for interval intrauterine device placement: a systematic review.BMJ sexual & reproductive health · 2025Pooled it
- Misoprostol for intrauterine device placement.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Interventions to prevent or treat heavy menstrual bleeding or pain associated with intrauterine-device use.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Medications to ease intrauterine device insertion: a systematic review.Contraception · 2016Pooled it
- Effect of Music on Pain, Anxiety, and Satisfaction During Intrauterine Device Application: A Randomized Clinical Trial.Research in nursing & health · 2026Trial
- Ultrasound Guidance Can Reduce IUD Insertion Time.Annals of family medicine · 2025Trial
- Use of naproxen versus intracervical block for pain control during the 52-mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system insertion in young women: a multivariate analysis of a randomized controlled trial.BMC women's health · 2021Trial
- Anticipated Pain During Intrauterine Device Insertion.Journal of pediatric and adolescent gynecology · 2020Trial
- Paracervical Block for Intrauterine Device Placement Among Nulliparous Women: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Obstetrics and gynecology · 2018Trial
- Satisfaction With the Intrauterine Device Insertion Procedure Among Adolescent and Young Adult Women.Obstetrics and gynecology · 2018Trial
- Pain at intrauterine device placement in a Brazilian center.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026Article
- When Ultrasound and Hysterometry Disagree: Challenges in Levonorgestrel-Releasing Intrauterine System Placement.Cureus · 2026Article
- Article
- Differences in pain regimens among nulliparous patients undergoing intrauterine device placement within a single health system.American journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2025Article
- Virtual Reality for Analgesia During Intrauterine Device Insertion: Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR serious games · 2025Article
- Do Women Feel Unprepared for the Experience of an Intrauterine Device Insertion: Findings From an Australian Study.Perspectives on sexual and reproductive health · 2025Article
- Investigating the impact of trial retractions on the healthcare evidence ecosystem (VITALITY Study I): retrospective cohort study.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2025Article
- Article
- Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Comparing Safety and Efficacy of Pharmacological Treatments in Reducing Pain During Intrauterine Device Insertion.Sultan Qaboos University medical journal · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFear of pain during insertion of intrauterine contraception (IUC) is a barrier to use of this method. IUC includes copper-containing intrauterine devices and levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine systems. Interventions for pain control during IUC insertion include non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), local cervical anesthetics, and cervical ripening agents such as misoprostol.
objectivesTo review randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions for reducing IUC insertion-related pain SEARCH
methodsWe searched for trials in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, POPLINE, ClinicalTrials.gov, and ICTRP. The most recent search was 22 June 2015. We examined reference lists of pertinent articles. For the initial review, we wrote to investigators to find other published or unpublished trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included RCTs that evaluated an intervention for preventing IUC insertion-related pain. The comparison could have been a placebo, no intervention, or another active intervention. The primary outcomes were self-reported pain at tenaculum placement, during IUC insertion, and after IUC insertion (up to six hours). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors extracted data from eligible trials. For dichotomous variables, we calculated the Mantel-Haenszel odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). For continuous variables, we computed the mean difference (MD) with 95% CI. In meta-analysis of trials with different measurement scales, we used the standardized mean difference (SMD). MAIN
resultsWe included 33 trials with 5710 participants total; 29 were published from 2010 to 2015. Studies examined lidocaine, misoprostol, NSAIDs, and other interventions. Here we synthesize results from trials with sufficient outcome data and moderate- or high-quality evidence.For lidocaine, meta-analysis showed topical 2% gel had no effect on pain at tenaculum placement (two trials) or on pain during IUC insertion (three trials). Other formulations were effective compared with placebo in individual trials. Mean score for IUC-insertion pain was lower with lidocaine and prilocaine cream (MD -1.96, 95% CI -3.00 to -0.92). Among nulliparous women, topical 4% formulation showed lower scores for IUC-insertion pain assessed within 10 minutes (MD -15.90, 95% CI -22.77 to -9.03) and at 30 minutes later (MD -11.10, 95% CI -19.05 to -3.15). Among parous women, IUC-insertion pain was lower with 10% spray (median 1.00 versus 3.00). Compared with no intervention, pain at tenaculum placement was lower with 1% paracervical block (median 12 versus 28).For misoprostol, meta-analysis showed a higher mean score for IUC insertion compared with placebo (SMD 0.27, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.46; four studies). In meta-analysis, cramping was more likely with misoprostol (OR 2.64, 95% CI 1.46 to 4.76; four studies). A trial with nulliparous women found a higher score for IUC-insertion pain with misoprostol (median 46 versus 34). Pain before leaving the clinic was higher for misoprostol in two trials with nulliparous women (MD 7.60, 95% CI 6.48 to 8.72; medians 35.5 versus 20.5). In one trial with nulliparous women, moderate or severe pain at IUC insertion was less likely with misoprostol (OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.55). In the same trial, the misoprostol group was more likely to rate the experience favorably. Within two trials of misoprostol plus diclofenac, shivering, headache, or abdominal pain were more likely with misoprostol. Participants had no vaginal delivery. One trial showed the misoprostol group less likely to choose or recommend the treatment.Among multiparous women, mean score for IUC-insertion pain was lower for tramadol 50 mg versus naproxen 550 mg (MD -0.63, 95% CI -0.94 to -0.32) and for naproxen versus placebo (MD -1.94, 95% CI -2.35 to -1.53). The naproxen group was less likely than the placebo group to report the insertion experience as unpleasant and not want the medication in the future. An older trial showed repeated doses of naproxen 300 mg led to lower pain scores at one hour (MD -1.04, 95% CI -1.67 to -0.41) and two hours (MD -0.98, 95% CI -1.64 to -0.32) after insertion. Most women were nulliparous and also had lidocaine paracervical block. AUTHORS'
conclusionsNearly all trials used modern IUC. Most effectiveness evidence was of moderate quality, having come from single trials. Lidocaine 2% gel, misoprostol, and most NSAIDs did not help reduce pain. Some lidocaine formulations, tramadol, and naproxen had some effect on reducing IUC insertion-related pain in specific groups. The ineffective interventions do not need further research.
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.