Placement of an intrauterine device within 48 hours after early medical abortion—a randomized controlled trial - 22/12/22
Abstract |
Background |
Intrauterine devices are safe, well-tolerated, and known to reduce the risk of unwanted pregnancies. At medical abortion, intrauterine devices are placed at a follow-up visit. Patients who miss this visit risk being left without contraception.
Objective |
This study aimed to investigate if placement of an intrauterine device within 48 hours of completed medical abortion at up to 63 days’ gestation leads to higher user rates at 6 months after the abortion compared with placement at 2 to 4 weeks after abortion. Furthermore, we aimed to compare continued use of intrauterine devices, safety, and patient satisfaction between groups.
Study Design |
We performed an open-label, randomized, controlled, multicenter, superiority trial (phase 3). A total of 240 patients requesting medical abortion at up to 63 days’ gestation and opting for an intrauterine device were allocated to placement within 48 hours of complete medical abortion (intervention group) or at 2 to 4 weeks after abortion (control group). We defined the abortion as complete after bleeding with clots and cessation of heavy bleeding following the use of misoprostol. Patients answered questionnaires at 3, 6, and 12 months. The primary outcome was use of intrauterine device at 6 months postabortion. Secondary outcomes included expulsion rate, pain at placement, adverse events and complications from the abortion, acceptability, and pregnancies and their outcomes. Differences in nonparametric continuous variables were analyzed with the Mann–Whitney U test and differences in dichotomous variables with the chi square or Fisher exact tests. A P value of <.05 was considered statistically significant.
Results |
In the intervention group, 91 of 111 (82%) participants used an intrauterine device at 6 months after the abortion vs 87 of 112 (77.7%) in the control group, with a difference in proportion of 4.3% (95% confidence interval, −0.062 to 0.148; P=.51). Attendance rate and rate of successful intrauterine device placement were similar between the groups. Patients in the intervention group had lower pain scores at placement of the intrauterine device (mean pain score [visual analogue scale], 32.3; standard deviation, 29) compared with the control group (mean pain score [visual analogue scale], 43.4; standard deviation, 27.9; P=.002). Patients preferred their allocated time of placement significantly more often in the intervention group (83/111, 74.8%) than in the control group (70/114, 61.4%; P=.03). Use of ultrasound at intrauterine device placement (because of doubts concerning complete abortion) was more common in the intervention group (43/108, 39.8%) than in the control group (15/101, 14.9%; P<.001), and in one patient in the control group a retained gestational sac was found. Three patients in the intervention group and 2 in the control group had a vacuum aspiration. No difference was found in intrauterine device expulsion rates between the groups. Expulsion during the first 6 months after abortion was experienced by 9 of 97 (9.3%) patients in the intervention group and 4 of 89 (4.5%; P=.25) in the control group. There were no perforations or infections requiring antibiotic treatment.
Conclusion |
Placement of an intrauterine device within 48 hours after medical abortion at ≤63 days’ gestation does not lead to higher user rates at 6 months after the abortion compared with intrauterine device placement at 2 to 4 weeks after abortion. When compared with placement at a follow-up visit after 2 to 4 weeks, intrauterine device placement within 48 hours after early medical abortion seems safe, is preferred by patients, and is associated with lower pain scores.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Key words : contraception, copper intrauterine devices, family planning services, hormone-releasing intrauterine device, induced abortion, long-acting reversible contraception, medicated intrauterine devices, postabortion intrauterine device insertion
Plan
S.H. reports personal fees from Gedeon Richter and Bayer, outside the submitted work; N.E. reports personal fees from Bayer Sweden AB for educational activities outside the submitted work; K.G.D. reports honoraria for educational activities and consultations for MSD/Organon, Bayer AG, Gedeon Richter, Exeltis, Azanta, HRA-Pharma, Mithra, Natural Cycles, CampusPharma, Cirqle Biomedical, Medicine360, MedinCell, Myovant Sciences, and Exelgyn, and her clinic has participated in clinical trials conducted by Exeltis, Mithra, Bayer, MSD, RemovAid, and Myovant Sciences. H.K.K. reports personal fees for educational activities for Actavis, Bayer, CampusPharma, Gedeon Richter, Exeltis, Nordic Pharma, Natural Cycles, Mithra, Consilient Health, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, MSD/Organon, Preglife, provision of expert opinions for Bayer, Evolan Pharma, Gedeon Richter, Exeltis, Merck & Co., Teva Pharmaceuticals, TV4 and Natural Cycles, Pharmiva, Dynamic Code, Ellen, Estercare, and Leia, and acting as an investigator in trials sponsored by Bayer, MSD, Mithra, Ethicon, Azanta, Gedeon Richter, Pharmiva, and Gedea outside the submitted work. The remaining authors report no conflict of interest. |
|
This research was funded by the Swedish Society of Medicine (SLS-692651) and Stockholm Region/Karolinska Institutet (ALF, LS-2016-1376, RS 2019-1054. K 0138-2015, LS 2018-1257). Grants paid for hormonal intrauterine devices used in the study and salaries for participating researchers and staff. |
|
The Center for Clinical Research Dalarna, Uppsala University (CKFUU-789891, CKFUU-895571, CKFUU-934198, CKFUU-936612, CKFUU-940743, CKFUU-963459) provided financial support for S.H. when conducting the study and preparing the article during her doctoral studies and for salaries for participating staff. The funding sources were not involved in study design, the collection, analysis, or interpretation of data, the writing of the report, or the decision to submit the article for publication. |
|
The clinical trial identification number and the URL of the registration site i) Date of registration July 27, 2018 ii) Date of initial participant enrollment January 16, 2019 iii) Clinical trial identification number NCT03603145 iv) URL of the registration site ClinicalTrials.gov v) Data will be made available upon request from the corresponding author |
|
Cite this article as: Hogmark S, Lichtenstein Liljeblad K, Envall N, et al. Placement of an intrauterine device within 48 hours after early medical abortion—a randomized controlled trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2023;228:53.e1-9. |
Vol 228 - N° 1
P. 53.e1-53.e9 - janvier 2023 Retour au numéroBienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?