Intranasal fentanyl for first-trimester uterine aspiration pain: A randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether administration of intranasal fentanyl reduces reported pain during first-trimester uterine aspiration. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of patients with pregnancies less than or equal to 14 weeks gestation seeking uterine aspiration for induced abortion, early pregnancy loss, or failed medication abortion. We randomized participants 1:1 to either intranasal fentanyl 100 mcg or intranasal placebo. All participants received ibuprofen and a standardized paracervical block. The primary outcome was pain indicated at the time of uterine aspiration on a 100 mm visual analog scale (VAS). We designed the study to detect a 15 mm difference in mean pain scores, which required 53 people in each arm for a total of 106 participants. Secondary outcomes included postprocedure pain and patient satisfaction with pain control. RESULTS: From March 2017 through June 2018, we screened 355 people for eligibility and enrolled 107 participants. Those who received intranasal fentanyl reported similar uterine aspiration pain to participants who received placebo (58.4 ± 28.0 fentanyl vs 58.6 ± 24.5 placebo, p = 0.97). Participants who received intranasal fentanyl also reported similar postprocedure pain scores compared to participants who received placebo (19.1 ± 19.4 fentanyl vs 17.2 ± 19 placebo, p = 0.63), and were equally satisfied with procedure pain control (66.8 ± 31.2 fentanyl vs 63.3 ± 29.2 placebo, p = 0.57). CONCLUSION: Intranasal fentanyl did not decrease reported pain with first-trimester uterine aspiration, nor did it decrease postprocedure pain compared to placebo. As an adjunct to ibuprofen and paracervical block, intranasal fentanyl did not improve patient satisfaction with pain control. IMPLICATIONS: Intranasal fentanyl does not reduce reported pain with first-trimester uterine aspiration, however abortion-seeking patients are amenable to receiving intranasal medications for pain management.

Expansion of a direct-to-patient telemedicine abortion service in the United States and experience during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: To present updated evidence on the safety, efficacy and acceptability of a direct-to-patient telemedicine abortion service and describe how the service functioned during the COVID-19 pandemic. STUDY DESIGN: We offered the study at 10 sites that provided the service in 13 states and Washington DC. Interested individuals obtained any needed preabortion tests locally and had a videoconference with a study clinician. Sites sent study packages containing mifepristone and misoprostol by mail and had remote follow-up consultations within one month by telephone (or by online survey, if the participant could not be reached) to evaluate abortion completeness. The analysis was descriptive. RESULTS: We mailed 1390 packages between May 2016 and September 2020. Of the 83% (1157/1390) of abortions for which we obtained outcome information, 95% (1103/1157) were completed without a procedure. Participants made 70 unplanned visits to emergency rooms or urgent care centers for reasons related to the abortion (6%), and 10 serious adverse events occurred, including 5 transfusions (0.4%). Enrollment increased substantially with the onset of COVID-19. Although a screening ultrasound was required, sites determined in 52% (346/669) of abortions that occurred during COVID that those participants should not get the test to protect their health. Use of urine pregnancy test to confirm abortion completion increased from 67% (144/214) in the 6 months prior to COVID to 90% (602/669) in the 6 months during COVID. Nearly all satisfaction questionnaires (99%, 1013/1022) recorded that participants were satisfied with the service. CONCLUSIONS: This direct-to-patient telemedicine service was safe, effective, and acceptable, and supports the claim that there is no medical reason for mifepristone to be dispensed in clinics as required by the Food and Drug Administration. In some cases, participants did not need to visit any facilities to obtain the service, which was critical to protecting patient safety during the COVID-19 pandemic. IMPLICATIONS: Medical abortion using telemedicine and mail is effective and can be safely provided without a pretreatment ultrasound. This method of service delivery has the potential to greatly improve access to abortion care in the United States.

Serum human chorionic gonadotropin decline following aspiration abortion in early pregnancy less than 42 days gestation.

OBJECTIVE: To define serum human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) decline following complete aspiration abortion. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a secondary analysis of 86 patients who underwent uncomplicated aspiration abortion for ultrasound-confirmed pregnancy ≤42 days gestation and had serum hCG at the time of aspiration and within 3 days postprocedure. RESULTS: Median hCG declines were 72.9% by day 1 (n = 14), 87.6% by day 2 (n = 50), and 92.8% by day 3 (n = 22). Ninetieth percentile declines were 67.8%, 81.5%, and 90.8%. Minimum hCG declines were 56.2%, 77.3%, and 83.2%. Trends did not vary by gestational age or by initial hCG <3000 mIU/mL. CONCLUSION: Postprocedure hCG trend varies over the first few days in early gestation. At ≤42 days gestation, serial hCG decline at 1 day after completed aspiration abortion is greater than 50%, consistent with the decline observed in medication abortion. IMPLICATIONS: This study confirms previously estimated human chorionic gonadotropin decline after aspiration abortion of at least 50% at 24 hours for completed procedure in very early gestations. Minimum declines on days 2 and 3 are approximately 70% and 80%.

Cannabinoids for Pain Control During Medical Abortion: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether prophylactic dronabinol, a synthetic tetrahydrocannabinol, reduces pain during medical abortion. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of women undergoing medical abortion with mifepristone and misoprostol up through 70 days of gestation. All participants received 800 mg of ibuprofen and were randomized to either 5 mg of oral dronabinol or a placebo 30 minutes before misoprostol administration. Participants used a text messaging service to report pain on a numeric rating scale from 0 to 10 (0=no pain, 10=worst pain). The primary outcome was maximum pain experienced during the 24 hours after misoprostol administration. Secondary outcomes were pain scores at 0, 6, and 24 hours after misoprostol administration; maximum anxiety and nausea scores; use of additional pain medication; reported side effects; and satisfaction (yes or no). We needed 68 participants (34 per group) to have 80% power to detect a 2-point difference in maximum pain on a numeric rating scale. RESULTS: From November 2018 to May 2019, we randomized 70 women (dronabinol=35, placebo=35). Participants in the study arms had comparable baseline characteristics. We found no difference between groups in the median maximum pain score reported (dronabinol 7 [interquartile range 6-8], placebo 7 [interquartile range 5-8], P=.82) or median pain scores at any timepoint. Groups were also no different in mean maximum anxiety (dronabinol 3.33 [SD 3.06], placebo 3.23 [SD 2.53], P=.88) or nausea scores (dronabinol 2.21 [SD 2.32], placebo 2.72 [SD 2.64], P=.41). Most women were satisfied with their pain management (76% dronabinol, 82% placebo, P=.51). CONCLUSION: Dronabinol does not reduce the maximum level of pain experienced by women undergoing medical abortion. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03604341.

Safety and effectiveness of medication and aspiration abortion before or during the sixth week of pregnancy: A retrospective multicenter study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare adverse outcomes of medication and aspiration abortion among those with intrauterine pregnancy <43 days gestation versus abortions performed at 43-48 days. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a multicenter retrospective chart review study to review all medication and aspiration abortion of visualized pregnancy <49 days gestation at Planned Parenthood Columbia Willamette (Oregon) and Planned Parenthood of Orange and San Bernardino Counties (California) in 2014-2015. We identified incident cases by billing codes and performed chart review for adverse outcomes (ED visits, incomplete abortion), need for further interventions, or complications (hemorrhage, infection, and uterine perforation), captured up to 90 days post-abortion. RESULTS: The 3930 abortions during the study period at the two sites included 2914 medication abortions and 1016 aspiration abortions, with 1470 medication abortions and 469 aspiration abortions at <43 days gestation. Composite adverse outcomes did not vary by gestation, for either medication abortion (75/1470; 5.1% for <43 days versus 94/1444; 6.5% at 43-48 days, p = 0.10) or aspiration (12/469; 2.6% for <43 days versus 16/547; 2.9% at 43-48 days, p = 0.72). Fewer incomplete abortions (ongoing pregnancy, symptomatic retained tissue, or retained gestational sac) occurred in the earlier gestational group (3.1% for <43 days versus 4.3% at 43-48 days, p = 0.04). Composite adverse outcomes were higher after medication versus aspiration abortion (169/2914; 5.8% versus 28/1016; 2.7%, p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Medication and aspiration abortion performed either before or during the sixth week of ultrasound-confirmed intrauterine pregnancy have low rates of composite adverse outcomes, including complications or incomplete abortion. However, unplanned interventions are more common after medication compared to aspiration abortions. IMPLICATIONS: Very early medication and aspiration abortion are similarly safe and effective before or during the sixth week of ultrasound-confirmed pregnancy, though subsequent interventions are more likely after medication abortion. Patients with early pregnancy can safely initiate abortion with follow-up to ensure complete abortion.

Refining paracervical block techniques for pain control in first trimester surgical abortion: a randomized controlled noninferiority trial.

OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to evaluate two different aspects of the paracervical block (PCB) technique for first trimester surgical abortion, to compare a 3-min wait prior to cervical dilation to no wait and to compare four-site with two-site injection. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted two consecutive randomized, single-blinded noninferiority trials. In the first trial, women <11 weeks gestational age received a 20-mL 1% buffered lidocaine four-site PCB with either a 3-min wait between PCB injection and dilation or no wait. In the second trial, we compared a four-site with a two-site PCB. We evaluated dilation pain [100-mm visual analogue scale (VAS)] as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included pain at additional time points, anxiety, satisfaction and adverse events. RESULTS: Both trials fully enrolled (total n=332). Results were inconclusive as to whether no wait was noninferior to waiting 3-min prior to cervical dilation for dilation pain [VAS: 63 mm (SD, 24 mm) vs. 56 mm (SD, 32mm)] and as to whether a two-site PCB was noninferior to a four-site block [VAS: 68 mm (SD, 21 mm) vs. 60 mm (SD, 30 mm)]. Noninferiority analysis was inconclusive because the confidence interval of the mean pain score difference between groups included the predefined inferiority margin of 13-mm pain difference. Superiority analysis showed the four-site PCB to be superior to the two-site PCB. CONCLUSION: It remained inconclusive whether a 3-min wait time between PCB and cervical dilation provides noninferior pain control for first trimester surgical abortion. However, a four-site PCB appeared to be superior to a two-site PCB. IMPLICATIONS: It remained inconclusive whether a 3-min wait time between PCB and cervical dilation or using a two-site instead of a four-site PCB provided noninferior pain control for first trimester surgical abortion. This study did not assess whether the combination of the two separate factors provides additive benefit.

Aspiration Abortion With Immediate Intrauterine Device Insertion: Comparing Outcomes of Advanced Practice Clinicians and Physicians.

INTRODUCTION: Immediate postabortion intrauterine device (IUD) insertion is a safe, effective strategy to prevent subsequent unplanned pregnancy. Oregon is one of 5 US states where advanced practice clinicians perform aspiration abortions. This study compares outcomes of first-trimester aspiration abortion with immediate IUD insertion between advanced practice clinicians and physicians. METHODS: We conducted a historical cohort study of first-trimester aspiration abortions with immediate IUD insertion performed at our center from 2009 to 2011. We extracted demographic and clinical data from patient charts. Immediate complications including excessive blood loss, perforation, and reaspirations were recorded at the time of procedure. We used descriptive statistics and multivariable logistic regression to test for differences in outcomes by clinician type. RESULTS: Data were available on 669 of the 1134 combined procedures. Advanced practice clinicians performed 224 of these. There were no significant differences in immediate outcomes. The only immediate complications were reaspirations; 1.8% (4/224) in the advanced practice clinician group, and 2.0% (9/445) in the physician group (P = .83). DISCUSSION: We found no differences in outcomes between provider type for immediate IUD insertion after first-trimester aspiration abortion. This study helps reinforce that advanced practice clinicians can provide immediate postaspiration abortion IUD insertions with similar outcomes to those of physicians. Many countries do not allow advanced practice clinicians to perform this service, but a change in policy could help address family planning provider shortages.

Intrauterine device placement at 3 versus 6 weeks postpartum: a randomized trial.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether early placement of an intrauterine device (IUD) at 3 weeks after delivery, compared to placement at 6 weeks, is associated with greater use at 3 months postpartum. STUDY DESIGN: This prospective randomized, controlled trial enrolled inpatient postpartum women intending to use intrauterine contraception. Participants were assigned to an early (3 week) or standard (6 week) postpartum visit with IUD placement and were followed for 6 months. We used transvaginal ultrasonography to confirm placement and measure uterine dimensions. We measured pain with IUD insertion and satisfaction with IUD timing using 100-mm visual analog scales. Data were analyzed based on randomization and actual timing of insertion (18-24 vs. 39-45 days). RESULTS: Between February 2012 and December 2013, 201 subjects were enrolled (early=101; standard=100). Most participants returned for IUD placement as scheduled; 70.1% (53/75) in the early group, 74.3% (58/78) in the standard group (p=.06). IUD use did not differ between groups at 3 months (73/100, 73.0% and 73/97, 75.3%, respectively, p=.72) or 6 months (80.3% and 82.8%, p=.71) amongst those women for whom follow-up was available. Women randomized to 6-week insertion were more likely to have resumed intercourse prior to the IUD appointment (15/64, 23.4% vs. 5/68, 7.3%, p=.01). Pain with insertion (19.9 vs. 25.1, respectively, p=.21) and satisfaction (89.6 vs. 93.4, respectively, p=.23) did not vary based on actual timing of insertion. CONCLUSION: Offering IUD placement at 3 weeks postpartum compared to standard scheduling at 6 weeks does not result in increased use at 3 months. However, early IUD placement is acceptable to women and without increased pain. IMPLICATIONS: This study demonstrates that IUD placement as early as 3 weeks postpartum is feasible. Larger studies are needed to evaluate risks and benefits of IUD placement at this early interval. While earlier timing does not result in increased IUD uptake, early placement should be explored as an option since many women resume intercourse before 6 weeks.

Immediate Intrauterine Device Insertion Following Surgical Abortion.

Placement of an intrauterine device (IUD) immediately after a first or second trimester surgical abortion is safe and convenient and decreases the risk of repeat unintended pregnancy. Immediate postabortion IUD placement is not recommended in the setting of postprocedure hemorrhage, uterine perforation, infection, or hematometra. Otherwise, there are few contraindications to IUD placement following surgical abortion. Sexually transmitted infection screening should follow US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines. No additional antibiotics are needed beyond those used for the abortion. Placing immediate postabortion IUDs makes highly-effective long-acting reversible contraception more accessible to women.

An Evaluation of Oral Midazolam for Anxiety and Pain in First-Trimester Surgical Abortion: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the effect of oral midazolam on patient pain and anxiety perception during first-trimester surgical abortion. METHODS: Between May and December 2013, we conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Patients between 6 0/7 and 10 6/7 weeks of gestation received 10 mg oral midazolam or placebo 30-60 minutes before surgical abortion. All patients received ibuprofen and a paracervical block. We powered the study (power=80%; significance level=.025) to detect a 15-mm difference in our two a priori primary outcomes of pain and anxiety with uterine aspiration on a 100-mm visual analog scale. Secondary outcomes were pain and anxiety at additional time points, memory, satisfaction, side effects, and adverse events. RESULTS: Demographics were similar between groups (placebo=62, midazolam=62). Compared with those randomized to placebo, patients who received midazolam had significantly less anxiety preoperatively (room entry: 51.4 mm compared with 34.5 mm, P<.001; positioning: 56.6 mm compared with 45.4 mm, P=.02). There was no difference in pain (P=.28) or anxiety (P=.14) during uterine aspiration or at other procedural time points. A significantly greater number of patients in the midazolam group reported partial amnesia (31/61 compared with 16/61, P=.005) and dizziness (30/61 compared with 18/61, P=.03). Controlling for baseline differences, patients who received midazolam reported more postoperative sleepiness (P<.001) and less postoperative nausea (P=.004). There was no difference in overall satisfaction (P=.88). CONCLUSION: Although oral midazolam reduces preprocedural anxiety, it does not reduce pain or anxiety with uterine aspiration during first-trimester surgical abortions. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01830881. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I.

Cervical Preparation Before Dilation and Evacuation Using Adjunctive Misoprostol or Mifepristone Compared With Overnight Osmotic Dilators Alone: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate operative time after adjunctive misoprostol or mifepristone compared with overnight osmotic dilators alone for cervical preparation before dilation and evacuation at 16-23 6/7 weeks of gestation. METHODS: This double-blind, three-arm, multicenter, randomized trial compared overnight osmotic dilators alone, dilators plus 400 micrograms buccal misoprostol 3 hours preoperatively, and dilators plus 200 mg oral mifepristone during dilator placement for dilation and evacuation. Our primary outcome was dilation and evacuation operative time within two cohorts: 16-18 6/7 weeks of gestation (N=150) and 19-23 6/7 weeks of gestation (N=150). Three hundred women were required for 80% power to detect a 2-minute difference in operative time. Secondary outcomes included initial cervical dilation, side effects, physician satisfaction by Likert scale, and complications. RESULTS: Between February 2013 and February 2014 we randomized 300 women evenly across treatment arms. Group demographics were similar. We found no difference in operative time in either gestational cohort (early cohort [minutes]: 5.11±3.0 dilators alone, 4.99±3.3 misoprostol, 4.33±2.0 mifepristone, P=.34; late cohort [minutes]: 7.50±3.7 dilators alone, 7.62±5.4 misoprostol, 6.74±3.2 mifepristone, P=.53). In the early cohort, initial dilation was greater with misoprostol than dilators alone (2.4 compared with 2.0 cm, P=.007). Patients given misoprostol had significantly more pain, fever, and chills. In the late cohort, dilation and evacuation procedures were less difficult after mifepristone (4.1%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.0-9.6) than misoprostol (18.8%, 95% CI 7.7-29.8) or dilators alone (18.8%, 95% CI 7.7-29.8; P=.04). We had inadequate power to infer differences in complications: dilators alone (10%, 95% CI 4.2-16.0) compared with misoprostol (2%, 95% CI 0-4.7) compared with mifepristone (2%, 95% CI 0-4.8). CONCLUSION: Despite no difference in operative time, adjunctive mifepristone facilitates later dilation and evacuation compared with osmotic dilators alone and is better tolerated than misoprostol. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01751087. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I.

Prophylactic ibuprofen does not improve pain with IUD insertion: a randomized trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate if ibuprofen 800mg reduces pain with intrauterine device (IUD) insertion among U.S. women. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of women undergoing IUD insertion approximately 2-6weeks following first-trimester uterine aspiration. Subjects were randomized to receive ibuprofen 800mg or placebo 30-45min prior to IUD insertion. A 100-mm visual analog scale (VAS) was administered to measure pain after speculum insertion (baseline) and immediately following IUD insertion. RESULTS: A total of 202 women were enrolled, with 101 randomized to each group (ibuprofen or placebo). Sociodemographic characteristics and baseline VAS scores were similar between groups. The median pain score with IUD insertion was 41.5mm in the placebo group and 38.0mm in the ibuprofen group (p=.50). Mean and median pain scores did not differ between placebo and ibuprofen when nulliparous and parous women were analyzed independently. Overall, median pain scores were 17.5mm higher in nulliparous women than parous women (p=.004). Median pain scores did not differ by age, IUD-type, history of dysmenorrhea or time since aspiration. CONCLUSIONS: Administration of ibuprofen 800mg prior to IUD insertion does not reduce pain associated with the procedure for U.S. women. Overall, nulliparous women report more pain with IUD insertion than multiparous women.

The effect of nitroglycerin on the IUD insertion experience in nulliparous women: a pilot study.

OBJECTIVE: Concern about pain during placement of an intrauterine device (IUD) represents a barrier to use, especially among nulliparous women. We hypothesized that nitroglycerin gel applied vaginally 30 min prior to IUD placement would reduce insertion-related pain. STUDY DESIGN: We designed a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled pilot study to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of 0.5-mg nitroglycerin gel (1 mL) or identical placebo gel applied vaginally in nulliparous women 30 min prior to IUD placement. The study was limited to women who opted for the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system. Subjects completed a series of 100-mm visual analogue scales at several time points. The primary outcome was subject-reported pain with passage of the IUD through the cervix. Secondary outcomes included subject-reported pain at other time points, provider-reported ease of insertion, side effects, adverse events and need for additional dilation. RESULTS: A total of 24 women were randomized. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. The mean pain score with IUD deployment was 55.0 mm [standard deviation (SD) = 29.7 mm] in the placebo group and 57.4 mm (SD 22.1 mm) in the nitroglycerin group (p=.82). There was no difference in ease of insertion reported by providers. Two subjects required dilation, one in each group. CONCLUSION: Vaginal administration of 0.5-mg nitroglycerin gel 30 min prior to IUD placement does not appear to decrease patient-reported procedural pain among nulliparous women or ease of insertion for providers.

Comparison of interventions for pain control with tenaculum placement: a randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: Although previous studies have demonstrated that a variety of local anesthetics are effective to decrease pain associated with tenaculum placement, no studies directly compare an injection with a topical anesthetic. The objective of this study was therefore to compare mean pain scores with tenaculum placement after an intracervical lidocaine injection or topical lidocaine gel. STUDY DESIGN: A randomized, single-blinded trial of women presenting for office gynecologic procedures that required a tenaculum. Women aged 18 years or older were randomized to receive either a 1% lidocaine intracervical injection or topical application of 2% lidocaine gel to the cervix immediately prior to tenaculum placement. The primary outcome was pain at the time of tenaculum placement, measured on a 100 mm Visual Analog Scale. Secondary outcomes included pain with the intervention and satisfaction with tenaculum placement. RESULTS: Seventy-four women were enrolled and randomized; 35 subjects in each group met criteria for analysis. The two groups had similar socio-demographic characteristics. Women who received the injection had lower mean pain levels at tenaculum placement [12.3 mm (S.D. 17.4 mm) versus 36.6 mm (S.D. 23.0 mm), p<.001] but higher mean pain levels with study drug application [20.4 mm (S.D. 19.4 mm) versus 5.9 mm (S.D. 8.6 mm), p<.001]. Satisfaction with tenaculum placement was similar for the two groups. CONCLUSION: Mean pain with tenaculum placement is lower after receiving a lidocaine injection than after receiving a topical lidocaine gel. Satisfaction with tenaculum placement is similar with both interventions.

The effect of nitroprusside on IUD insertion experience in nulliparous women: a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Concern about pain during placement of an intrauterine device (IUD) represents a barrier to use, especially among nulliparous women. We hypothesized that nitroprusside gel applied intracervically prior to IUD placement would reduce insertion-related pain. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled pilot study to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of 10-mg nitroprusside gel (1 mL) or identical placebo gel applied intracervically in nulliparous women immediately prior to IUD placement. Subjects completed a series of 100-mm visual analogue scales at several time points. The primary outcome was subject-reported pain with IUD insertion. Secondary outcomes included provider-reported ease of insertion, subject-reported pain at other time points, side effects, adverse events and need for additional dilation. RESULTS: A total of 24 women were randomized. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. The mean pain score with IUD deployment was 73 mm (SD 17 mm) in the placebo group and 59 mm (SD 26 mm) in the nitroprusside group (p=.15). There was no difference in ease of insertion reported by providers. Two subjects required dilation, one in each group. There were two vasovagal reactions in the nitroprusside group and none in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: Intracervical administration of 10-mg nitroprusside gel immediately prior to IUD insertion does not appear to provide a clinically relevant improvement in patient-reported pain with IUD insertion among nulliparous women.

Hydrocodone-acetaminophen for pain control in first-trimester surgical abortion: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: Although hydrocodone-acetaminophen is commonly used for pain control in first-trimester abortion, the efficacy of oral opioids for decreasing pain has not been established. Our objective was to estimate the effect of hydrocodone-acetaminophen on patient pain perception during first-trimester surgical abortion. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial. Patients (before 11 weeks of gestation) received standard premedication (ibuprofen and lorazepam) and a paracervical block with the addition of 10 mg hydrocodone and 650 mg acetaminophen or placebo 45-90 minutes before surgical abortion. A sample size of 120 was calculated to provide 80% power to show a 15-mm difference (α=0.05) in the primary outcome of pain with uterine aspiration (100-mm visual analog scale). Secondary outcomes were pain at additional time points, satisfaction, side effects, adverse events, and need for additional pain medications. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in demographics or baseline pain between groups. There were no differences in pain scores between patients receiving hydrocodone-acetaminophen compared with placebo during uterine aspiration (65.7 mm compared with 63.2 mm, P=.59) or other procedural time points. There were no differences in satisfaction or need for additional pain medications. Patients who received hydrocodone-acetaminophen had more postoperative nausea than those receiving placebo (P=.03) when controlling for baseline nausea. No medication-related adverse events were noted. CONCLUSION: Hydrocodone-acetaminophen does not decrease pain during first-trimester abortion and may increase postoperative nausea. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01330459. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I.

Adolescent experience with intrauterine device insertion and use: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Adolescents contribute disproportionately to the epidemic level of unintended pregnancy in the USA. Intrauterine devices (IUDs) are highly effective but underutilized in this age group. STUDY DESIGN: We searched our electronic clinic database to identify females ≤ 19 years old who underwent attempted IUD insertion between January 2007 and June 2009. This retrospective cohort study primarily compared the insertion and postinsertion experiences between nulliparous and parous teens. RESULTS: Of the 307 charts reviewed, the majority of subjects were white (73.4%) and nulliparous (77.5%), with a median age of 18 years (range 15-19). The vast majority (96.4%, 296/307) had a successful IUD insertion upon first attempt; all of the 11 unsuccessful IUD insertion attempts were among nulliparous teens. Follow-up was available for 56% (172/307). During the first 12 months of use, there were 2.9% (5/172) IUD expulsions and 24.4% (42/172) removals, with no differences between nulliparous and parous teens. IUD continuation at 6 months was 83.3%. Pelvic inflammatory disease was diagnosed in 4.6% (8/172) of post-IUD insertions. There were no pregnancies reported in those teens with IUD continuation, while six were reported in subjects who underwent IUD removal. Independent predictors of IUD discontinuation were a history of chronic pelvic pain or dysmenorrhea, and bleeding and/or pain complaints at any post-IUD visit. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, adolescents experience minimal complications with IUD use, with similar rates of successful insertion as adults. IUD discontinuation rates were not significantly different between nulliparous and parous teens. While discontinuation was higher than reported in adults, it was lower than reported among teens using other forms of contraception.

Immediate versus delayed IUD insertion after uterine aspiration.

BACKGROUND: Intrauterine devices (IUDs) provide highly effective, reversible, long-term contraception that is appropriate for many women after first-trimester uterine aspiration. However, the effects of immediate versus delayed IUD insertion after uterine aspiration on rates of complications and IUD use are uncertain. METHODS: We performed a randomized noninferiority trial involving women undergoing uterine aspiration for induced or spontaneous abortion at 5 to 12 weeks of gestation who desired an IUD. Subjects were randomly assigned (in a 5:6 ratio) to IUD insertion immediately after the procedure or 2 to 6 weeks afterward (delayed insertion). The primary outcome was the rate of IUD expulsion 6 months after IUD insertion; an expulsion rate 8 percentage points higher in the immediate-insertion group was defined as inferior. RESULTS: Among 575 women who underwent randomization, an IUD was inserted in 100% (258 of 258) of the women in the immediate-insertion group and in 71.3% (226 of 317) of those in the delayed-insertion group (difference, 28.7 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 23.7 to 33.7). The 6-month expulsion risk was 5.0% (13 of 258 women) after immediate insertion and 2.7% (6 of 226) after delayed insertion (difference, 2.3 percentage points; 95% CI, -1.0 to 5.8), which was consistent with the predefined criterion for noninferiority. Six-month rates of IUD use were higher in the immediate-insertion group (92.3%, vs. 76.6% after delayed insertion; P<0.001). Adverse events were rare and did not differ significantly between groups. No pregnancies occurred in the immediate-insertion group; five occurred in the delayed-insertion group (P=0.07), all in women who never received an IUD. CONCLUSIONS: The 6-month rate of expulsion of an IUD after immediate insertion was higher than but not inferior to that after delayed insertion. Immediate insertion resulted in higher rates of IUD use at 6 months, without an increased risk of complications. (Funded by the Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00562276.).

Safety, efficacy and patient acceptability of the contraceptive and non-contraceptive uses of the LNG-IUS.

Intrauterine devices (IUDs) provide highly effective, long-term, safe, reversible contraception, and are the most widely used reversible contraceptive method worldwide. The levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) is a T-shaped IUD with a steroid reservoir containing 52 mg of levonorgestrel that is released at an initial rate of 20 µg daily. It is highly effective, with a typical-use first year pregnancy rate of 0.1% - similar to surgical tubal occlusion. It is approved for 5 years of contraceptive use, and there is evidence that it can be effective for up to 7 years of continuous use. After removal, there is rapid return to fertility, with 1-year life-table pregnancy rates of 89 per 100 for women less than 30 years of age. Most users experience a dramatic reduction in menstrual bleeding, and about 15% to 20% of women become amenorrheic 1 year after insertion. The device's strong local effects on the endometrium benefit women with various benign gynecological conditions such as menorrhagia, dysmenorrhea, leiomyomata, adenomyosis, and endometriosis. There is also evidence to support its role in endometrial protection during postmenopausal estrogen replacement therapy, and in the treatment of endometrial hyperplasia.

Barriers associated with the failure to return for intrauterine device insertion following first-trimester abortion.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to identify barriers associated with the failure to return for delayed intrauterine device (IUD) insertion postabortion. STUDY DESIGN: This study had two components: (a) a retrospective cohort study of women who chose an IUD as their postabortion contraceptive method to compare characteristics of those who did and did not receive a device within 6 months of the procedure and (b) a prospective survey of women intending IUD use postabortion to assess actual IUD use at 6 weeks, barriers to access and attitudes on insertion timing. RESULTS: Of the 500 abortion patient charts available for review during the study period, 53 women intended IUD use postabortion. At 6 months, only 32% intending an IUD received one, and there were no significant demographic differences between the groups. For the prospective portion, the response rate at 6 weeks was 54% (27/50), with only 26% (7/27) of responders reporting IUD insertion by this time. The principal reported barrier to IUD insertion was time needed for an additional visit (41%). Most women (67%) desired immediate insertion and believed that they would be more likely to have an IUD inserted if it is performed immediately postabortion (63%). Monthly income was the only statistically significant difference between those who responded to the 6-week follow-up (US$1409.50) and those who did not (US$937.50, p=.05). CONCLUSION: A significant number of women that express a preference for IUD use after first-trimester abortion do not return to obtain a device. Most would prefer to have the option of immediate insertion.