Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36302159›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2022

Immediate versus delayed postpartum insertion of contraceptive implant and IUD for contraception.

Jen Sothornwit, Srinaree Kaewrudee, Pisake Lumbiganon, Porjai Pattanittum, Sarah H Averbach

Open access · greenAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
5.6field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Expanding access to postpartum contraception.Current opinion in obstetrics & gynecology · 2024
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Jen SothornwitDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand.
Srinaree KaewrudeeDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand.
Pisake LumbiganonDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand.
Porjai PattanittumDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Faculty of Public Health, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand.
Sarah H AverbachOB/GYN and Reproductive Sciences, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA.
Khon Kaen University · THUniversity of California, San Diego · US

Funding

UC San Diego Womens Reproductive Health Research ProgramK12HD001259 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI CYNTHIA GYAMFI-BANNERMAN · 1999 to 2026
$9.1M
NICHD NIH HHS K12 HD001259
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLong-acting reversible contraception (LARC), including intrauterine devices (IUDs) and contraceptive implants, are highly effective, reversible methods of contraception. Providing LARC methods during the postpartum period is important to support contraceptive choice, and to prevent unintended pregnancy and short interpregnancy intervals. Delaying offering contraception to postpartum people until the first comprehensive postpartum visit, traditionally at around six weeks postpartum, may put some postpartum people at risk of unintended pregnancy, either due to loss to follow-up or because of initiation of sexual intercourse prior to receiving contraception. Therefore, immediate provision of highly effective contraception, prior to discharge from hospital, has the potential to improve contraceptive use and prevent unintended pregnancies and short interpregnancy intervals.

objectivesTo compare the initiation rate, utilization rates (at six months and 12 months after delivery), effectiveness, and adverse effects of immediate versus delayed postpartum insertion of implants and IUDs for contraception. SEARCH

methodsWe searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and POPLINE for eligible studies up to December 2020. We examined review articles and contacted investigators. We checked registers of ongoing clinical trials, citation lists of included studies, key textbooks, grey literature, and previous systematic reviews for potentially relevant studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We sought randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared immediate postpartum versus delayed insertion of contraceptive implant and IUDs for contraception. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors (JS, SK) independently screened titles and abstracts of the search results, and assessed the full-text articles of potentially relevant studies for inclusion. They extracted data from the included studies, assessed risk of bias, compared results, and resolved disagreements by consulting a third review author (PL, SA or PP). We contacted investigators for additional data, where possible. We computed the Mantel-Haenszel or inverse variance risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for binary outcomes and the mean difference (MD) with 95% CI for continuous variables. MAIN

resultsIn this updated review, 16 studies met the inclusion criteria; five were studies of contraceptive implants (715 participants) and 11 were studies of IUDs (1894 participants). We identified 12 ongoing studies. We applied GRADE judgements to our results; the overall certainty of the evidence for each outcome ranged from moderate to very low, with the main limitations being risk of bias, inconsistency, and imprecision. Contraceptive implants Immediate insertion probably improves the initiation rate for contraceptive implants compared with delayed insertion (RR 1.48, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.98; 5 studies, 715 participants; I AUTHORS'

conclusionsEvidence from this updated review indicates that immediate postpartum insertion improves the initiation rate of both contraceptive implants and IUDs by the first postpartum visit compared to delayed insertion. However, it is not clear whether that there are differences in utilization rates at six and 12 months postpartum. We are uncertain whether there is any difference in the unintended pregnancy rate at 12 months. Provision of progestin-releasing implants and IUDs immediately postpartum may have little or no negative impact on breastfeeding. However, the expulsion rate of IUDs and prolonged vaginal bleeding associated with immediate implants appears to be higher.

Indexed as

Intrauterine DevicesProgestinsContraceptionContraceptive AgentsFemaleHumansPostpartum PeriodPregnancyUterine HemorrhageContraceptive AgentsProgestins

Identifiers

PMID36302159
PMCPMC9612833
OpenAlexW4307774026

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.