ArticleInternational journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics2026
Pain at intrauterine device placement in a Brazilian center.
Article in International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study explores pain at intrauterine device (IUD) placement in a large Brazilian cohort.
methodsWe undertook a cross-sectional analysis of health records from individuals aged 18 to 45 years who underwent IUD placements between 2022 and 2024 at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Universidade Estadual de Campinas Faculty of Medical Sciences, Campinas, Brazil. Insertion pain was measured immediately after the procedure using a 10-cm visual analogue scale (VAS). Scores were classified as no pain (0), mild pain (1-3), moderate pain (4-6), and severe pain (≥7). Pain relief included analgesics, antispasmodics, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and opioids. We used multivariable regression to assess the association between pre-insertion pain relief and pain during placement.
resultsWe evaluated 6974 individuals. Of 7259 fittings analyzed, 228 (3%) occurred with no pain, 1121 (15%) with mild pain, 2003 (28%) with moderate pain, and 3907 (54%) with severe pain (median [interquartile range] pain score of 7.0 [5.0-8.0]). Clinicians provided pain relief in 429 (6%) of insertions (largely antispasmodics and NSAIDs). After adjusting for age and parity, antispasmodics were associated with moderate to severe pain (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.75; 95% confidence interval: 1.15; 2.68).
conclusionOur findings suggest that moderate to severe pain was experienced in 5910 (81%) of IUD insertions, in contrast with the 5% estimate in national guidelines. We also found evidence that pre-insertion antispasmodic medication was associated with higher moderate to severe pain. Our findings emphasize the need to update guidelines to recognize IUD insertion pain and provide options to manage discomfort.
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.