ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2022
Intrapartum versus postpartum insertion of intrauterine device in women delivering by cesarean section.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Conventional manual technique of post placental IUD insertion versus intra-cesarean post placental introducer withdrawal IUD insertion technique: a new standardized technique for IUD insertion during cesarean section: a randomized controlled trial.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2023Trial
- Case Report: Minimally invasive surgical management of a complex high rectovaginal fistula caused by long-term retained and migrated intrauterine device.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Strangulated intestinal obstruction caused by ectopic intrauterine device: a case report.BMC women's health · 2025Article
- Cystoscopic retrieval of a migrated IUD with bladder stone formation during pregnancy termination: a Case Report.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Novel Concepts for Intrauterine Device Placement at Caesarean Delivery: Description of Technique and Video Recording.Obstetrics and gynecology international · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe intrauterine device (IUD), being a reversible and effective contraception method, is the most widely used worldwide. This study aims to demonstrate the efficacy of IUD insertion during elective lower segment cesarean section (LSCS) versus its insertion six weeks postpartum.
methodsA cohort study was conducted on 200 women planned for elective cesarean delivery and desired IUD as a contraceptive method. They were allocated into two groups; group I, in which IUD was inserted during LSCS, and group II, in which IUD was inserted six weeks or more after LSCS. Both groups were compared regarding failed insertion, post-insertion pain, and uterine perforation. They were followed for one year for the incidence of menorrhagia, vaginal infection, IUD displacement/expulsion, missed threads, or unintended pregnancy.
resultsWomen in the second group showed a significantly higher incidence of failed insertion and uterine perforation than women in the first group. On the contrary, women in the first group showed a significantly higher incidence of missed threads than women in the second group. Regarding other consequences, there were no significant differences between both groups concerning menorrhagia, vaginal infection, IUD displacement/expulsion, or unintended pregnancy.
conclusionIUD insertion during elective LSCS showed a significantly lower incidence of failed insertion and uterine perforation than its insertion six weeks postoperative.
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.