Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41127231›Full record

ReviewSultan Qaboos University medical journal2025

Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Comparing Safety and Efficacy of Pharmacological Treatments in Reducing Pain During Intrauterine Device Insertion.

Ahmed Ashour, Ahmed H Saad, Iman Elzahaby

Abstract readReviewNetwork Meta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Review in Sultan Qaboos University medical journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Ahmed AshourDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, Arabian Gulf University, Manama, Bahrain.
Ahmed H SaadDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University, Giza, Egypt.
Iman ElzahabyDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University, Giza, Egypt.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Conflicting evidence exists regarding the effectiveness of pharmacological interventions in reducing pain during intrauterine device (IUD) insertion. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of various analgesics and to rank their effectiveness. A total of 71 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 10,870 women were included. Data were sourced from PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and other databases up to September 2023. Analyses were performed using the Netmeta package in R, with results reported as standardized mean differences (SMDs) and risk ratios (RRs), each with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Lidocaine 4% gel (5 mL) emerged as the most effective option for pain relief during IUD insertion (SMD = -4.5; 95% CI: -5.9- -3.0; low-quality evidence), followed by lidocaine 1% solution (10 mL; SMD = -3.20). Lidocaine 4% gel also ranked highest for reducing pain during tenaculum placement, while misoprostol 400 mcg improved the ease of IUD insertion. Despite the low quality of evidence, lidocaine 4% gel appears to be the most effective pharmacological intervention for pain reduction during IUD insertion.

Indexed as

Intrauterine DevicesPainPain ManagementAnalgesicsAnesthetics, LocalFemaleHumansLidocaineRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAnalgesicsAnesthetics, LocalLidocaineAnesthetics, LocalAnti-Inflammatory AgentsIntrauterine DeviceMisoprostolNon-SteroidalPain Management

Identifiers

PMID41127231
PMCPMC12538906

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-ND
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.