ArticleFrontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland)2024
Validation of a novel medical device (Chloe SED®) for the administration of analgesia during manual vacuum aspiration: a randomized controlled non-inferiority pilot study.
Article in Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Millions of women worldwide annually undergo manual vacuum aspiration (MVA) with no pain medication, which is a violation of their basic human dignity. We designed a novel device (Chloe SED®) to administer paracervical block (PCB) during MVA in countries where pain medication is not typically given due to the high cost of the necessary tools. Methods: We conducted a single-blinded, randomized controlled non-inferiority trial including 61 patients at two hospitals in Kisumu, Kenya, to validate Chloe SED® for administration of PCB during MVA. PCB administered with Chloe SED® was compared to PCB administered with a standard spinal needle. Patients requiring MVA were block randomized in blocks of six, each provider completing six PCBs-three with the Chloe SED® and three with the standard spinal needle. The trial was registered with the Kenya Pharmacy and Poisons Board, ECCT/19/03/01 (https://ctr.pharmacyboardkenya.org/applications/index/protocol_no:RUNDVC8xOS8wMy8wMQ__/filter:/investigator:/sites:/pages:5/start_date:/end_date:/disease_condition:/users:/ercs:/stages). An intention-to-treat analysis was completed. The primary outcome was the non-inferiority of the pain score during uterine evacuation with a non-inferiority margin of 2 points on an 11-point numerical rating scale. Secondary outcomes included the non-inferiority of the pain score at four other time points and patient satisfaction. Results: Chloe SED® showed non-inferiority of the primary outcome with a mean pain score during evacuation of 3.8 [90% confidence interval (CI): 3.1-4.6] compared with the spinal needle at 4.1 (90% CI: 3.5-4.7). Non-inferiority of the pain score was shown at all time points. Most patients expressed a desire for the continued use of the device to administer PCB for MVA. No adverse events were noted. Conclusion: In summary, the Chloe SED® appears non-inferior to the spinal needle and desirable for the administration of PCB during MVA.
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.