Patients’ experiences and providers’ observations on pain during intrauterine device insertion

Pain experiences during intrauterine device procedures: a thematic analysis of tweets

INTRODUCTION

In June 2021, high-profile testimonials in the media about pain during intrauterine device (IUD) procedures in the UK prompted significant discussion across platforms including Twitter (subsequently renamed X). We examined a sample of Twitter postings (tweets) to gain insight into public perspectives and experiences.

METHODS

We harvested tweets posted or retweeted on 21-22 June 2021 which contained the search terms coil, intrauterine system, IUD or intrauterine. We analysed the dataset thematically and selected illustrative tweets with the authors' consent for publication.

RESULTS

Following deduplication and screening, we included 1431 tweets in our analysis. We identified testimonials with descriptions of varied pain experiences. Twitter users reported that clinicians had not warned them that pain could be severe or explained the options for pain relief. Some raised concerns about pain being minimised or dismissed and linked this to the management of women's pain in medicine more broadly. Twitter users described connecting to an online community with shared experiences as validating and used this as a springboard for collective action.

CONCLUSIONS

While we acknowledge the limitations of our sample, this study highlights important perspectives and accounts relating to pain during IUD procedures. Our findings attest to the need for strategies to improve the patient experience for those opting for IUD as a clinical priority. Further research should explore IUD users' experiences, expectations and wishes around pain management.

Effects of virtual reality on pain during intrauterine device insertions: A randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

The trial aimed to compare the pain perceived by women during intrauterine device (IUD) insertion, with or without virtual reality (VR) therapy. Furthermore, anxiety during the insertions, pain after the insertions, and satisfaction with the insertions were compared.

METHODS

The trial was designed as a prospective, bi-centric, randomized, open-label interventional trial. All adult women that chose an IUD during a contraceptive consultation, and who provided informed consent were eligible. Women under legal guardianship, not affiliated to a national social security system, and with pre-existing dizziness, severe facial wounds, or epilepsy were not eligible. Eligible women were randomly allocated either standard care without VR therapy (Control group) or with VR therapy (Experimental group). Pain, anxiety, and satisfaction were measured using a 10-cm numerical scale.

RESULTS

Between September 2020 and April 2022, 100 women were randomized: 50 to each group. The mean pain scores during IUD insertion were 5.4 cm in the Control group versus 5.1 cm in the Experimental group (p = 0.54). Mean anxiety during insertion were 4.8 cm in the Control group versus 4.2 cm in the Experimental group (p = 0.13). While mean pain perceived after insertions were 2.4 cm in the Control Group and 2.4 cm in the Experimental group (p = 0.98). Mean satisfaction with the insertions was 9.6 cm in both groups (p = 0.87). Anxiety before IUD insertion, as well as anticipated pain, were significantly correlated with pain perceived during insertions.

CONCLUSIONS

VR therapy performed during the procedure did not alleviate perceived pain in women undergoing IUD insertions.

Does Ultrasound Guidance Provide Pain Relief During Intrauterine Contraceptive Device Insertion? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate ultrasound guidance effect in pain relief during intrauterine device (IUD) insertion.

METHODS

Four different databases were searched from inception till June 2022. We selected randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared transabdominal ultrasound guidance versus traditional non-guided IUD insertion among women undergoing IUD placement for contraception. We used Revman software during performing our meta-analysis. Our primary outcome was the pain score during IUD insertion as evaluated by the Visual Analog Scale (VAS). Our secondary outcomes were the procedure insertion time, satisfaction, and incidences of complications and misplaced IUDs.

RESULTS

Seven RCTs were retrieved with a total number of 1267 patients. There was a significant reduction in the VAS pain score during IUD insertion among the ultrasound-guided group (MD = -1.91, 95% CI [-3.08, -0.73], P = .001). The procedure insertion time was significantly shorter within the ultrasound guidance group compared with the control group (MD = -1.35, 95% CI [-1.81, -0.88], P < .001). Moreover, more women were significantly satisfied with the procedure among the ultrasound-guided group (P < .001). In addition, ultrasound-guided IUD insertion was linked to significant decline in incidences of complications and misplaced IUDs.

CONCLUSION

Ultrasound guidance can be used as a modified technique during IUD insertion as it decreases pain, procedure time, and rates of complications and misplaced IUDs with better patient satisfaction.

10% lidocaine spray for pain control during intrauterine device insertion: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Various medications have been investigated for their efficacy in pain reduction during intrauterine device (IUD) insertion, but there is currently no standard recommendation. This study aimed to investigate the efficacy of 10% lidocaine spray in reducing pain during copper-containing intrauterine device (Cu-IUD) insertion.

METHODS

This study was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Reproductive-age women were randomised at a 1:1 ratio into 10% lidocaine spray or placebo spray group. A 10 cm visual analogue scale (VAS) was used to evaluate pain during several steps of the IUD insertion procedure, and after the procedure.

RESULTS

One hundred and twenty-four women were included and 62 women were randomised in each group. Baseline characteristics between groups were similar. The 10% lidocaine spray group demonstrated significantly lower median VAS immediately after IUD insertion than the placebo group (2.95 (IQR=1.00-5.63) vs 5.00 (IQR=3.35-7.00), respectively; p=0.002). Similarly, women receiving 10% lidocaine spray reported significantly lower median VAS than those receiving placebo during tenaculum use and uterine sounding. The maximum median VAS occurred immediately after Cu-IUD insertion. The proportion of women who reported VAS≥4 during uterine sounding and after IUD placement was significantly lower in the 10% lidocaine group than in the placebo group (p<0.05). Median change in VAS from baseline to IUD placement was significantly different between 10% lidocaine spray group and placebo group (1.85 (IQR=0.08-4.03) vs 3.6 (IQR=2.40-5.80), respectively; p=0.004).

CONCLUSION

10% lidocaine spray was found to be an effective local anaesthetic method for reducing pain during insertion of Cu-IUD.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03870711.

The value of ultrasound guidance during IUD insertion in women with RVF uterus: A randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

The study objective is to evaluate the benefits of using ultrasound guidance during insertion of Intrauterine device IUD in women with retroverted flexed RVF uteri.

STUDY DESIGN

A randomized controlled trial conducted on 400 women with RVF uteri eligible for IUD insertion. They were randomly divided into 2 groups. Group 1 underwent IUD insertion under ultrasound guidance while in group 2 no ultrasound guidance was used. The primary outcome measure was the(Visual Analogue Scale) VAS pain score reported by the women during insertion. Other outcome included easiness of insertion, the procedure time and occurrence of complications as nausea, vomiting, abdominal cramps, failure of insertion, uterine perforation and bleeding.

RESULTS

The VAS pain score was significantly lower (2.36 ± 1.77 vs. 4.74 ± 2.35, p < 0.001), the insertion was much easier (score 4.0 ± 0.9 vs. 2.5 ± 1.27, p < 0.001) and the time needed for the procedure was significantly shorter (5.82 ± 2.56 vs. 9.4 ± 4.99 min, p < 0.001) in women within the ultrasound guided group when compared to control group. The total rate of complications was significantly lower (6 vs. 16 %, p 0.001) especially bleeding (2 vs. 9%, p = 0.002), abdominal cramps (10.5 vs. 28 %, p 0.012) and failure of the procedure (0 vs. 3%, p = 005) in ultrasound guided group women when compared to control.

CONCLUSION

Insertion of Intrauterine device IUD under ultrasound guidance in women with Retroverted flexed RVF uterus easier and less painful than the blind standard technique.

[Intrauterine contraception: CNGOF Contraception Guidelines]

OBJECTIVE

To provide national clinical guidelines focusing on intrauterine contraception.

METHODS

A systematic review of available literature was performed using Pubmed and Cochrane libraries. American, British and Canadian guidelines were considered as well.

RESULTS

Intrauterine contraception (IUC) displays a wide panel of indications, including adolescents, nulliparous, patients living with HIV before AIDS (Grade B) and women with history of ectopic pregnancy (Grade C). Cervical cancer screening should not be modified in women with IUC (Grade B). Bimanual examination and cervix inspection are mandatory before device insertion (Grade B). Patients should not systematically undergo screening for sexually transmitted infections (STI) before device insertion (Grade B). Screening for STI should be preferably done before insertion but it can be performed at the time of device insertion in asymptomatic women (Grade B). Routine antibiotic prophylaxis and premedication are not recommended before insertion (Grade A). A follow-up visit may be offered several weeks after insertion (Professional consensus). Routine pelvic ultrasound examination in not recommended after device insertion (Grade B). In patients with IUC, unscheduled bleeding, when persistent or associated with pelvic pain, requires further investigation to rule out complication (Professional agreement). Suspected uterine perforation warrants radiological workup to locate the device (Professional consensus). Laparoscopic approach should be preferred for elective removal of intrauterine device from abdominal cavity (Professional consensus). In case of accidental pregnancy with intrauterine device in situ, ectopic pregnancy should be excluded (Grade B). In case of viable and desired intrauterine pregnancy, intrauterine device removal is recommended if the strings are reachable (Grade C). Detection of Actinomyces-like organisms on pap smear in asymptomatic patients with intrauterine contraception does not require further intervention (Grade B). Immediate removal of intrauterine device is not recommended in case of STI or pelvic inflammatory disease (Grade B). Device removal should be considered in the absence of clinical improvement after 48 to 72 hours of appropriate treatment (Grade B).

CONCLUSION

Intrauterine contraception is a long-acting and reversible contraception method displaying great efficacy and high continuation rate. In contrast, complication rate is low. It should thus be offered to both nulliparous and multiparous women.

Anticipated pain as a predictor of discomfort with intrauterine device placement

BACKGROUND

Intrauterine devices have been gaining popularity for the past 2 decades. Current data report that >10% of women who use contraception are using an intrauterine device. With <1% failure rates, the intrauterine device is one of the most effective forms of long-acting reversible contraception, yet evidence shows that fear of pain during intrauterine device placement deters women from choosing an intrauterine device as their contraceptive method.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this analysis was to estimate the association between anticipated pain with intrauterine device placement and experienced pain. We also assessed other factors associated with increased discomfort during intrauterine device placement. We hypothesized that patients with higher levels of anticipated pain would report a higher level of discomfort during placement.

STUDY DESIGN

We performed a secondary analysis of the Contraceptive CHOICE Project. There were 9256 patients enrolled in Contraceptive CHOICE Project from the St. Louis region from 2007-2011; data for 1149 subjects who came for their first placement of either the original 52-mg levonorgestrel intrauterine system or the copper intrauterine device were analyzed in this study. Patients were asked to report their anticipated pain before intrauterine device placement and experienced pain during placement on a 10-point visual analog scale. We assessed the association of anticipated pain, patient demographics, reproductive characteristics, and intrauterine device type with experienced pain with intrauterine device placement.

RESULTS

The mean age of Contraceptive CHOICE Project participants in this subanalysis was 26 years. Of these 1149 study subjects, 44% were black, and 53% were of low socioeconomic status. The median expected pain score was 5 for both the levonorgestrel intrauterine system and the copper intrauterine device; the median experienced pain score was 5 for the levonorgestrel intrauterine system and 4 for the copper intrauterine device. After we controlled for parity, history of dysmenorrhea, and type of intrauterine device, higher anticipated pain was associated with increased experienced pain (adjusted relative risk for 1 unit increase in anticipated pain, 1.19; 95% confidence interval, 1.14-1.25). Nulliparity, history of dysmenorrhea, and the hormonal intrauterine device (compared with copper) also were associated with increased pain with intrauterine device placement.

CONCLUSION

High levels of anticipated pain correlated with high levels of experienced pain during intrauterine device placement. Nulliparity and a history of dysmenorrhea were also associated with greater discomfort during placement. This information may help guide and treat patients as they consider intrauterine device placement. Future research should focus on interventions to reduce preprocedural anxiety and anticipated pain to potentially decrease discomfort with intrauterine device placement.

Intrauterine contraception insertion pain: nursing interventions to improve patient experience

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To examine factors which contribute to the individual's experience of pain in relation to intrauterine contraception insertion and determine evidence-based nursing strategies to best assess and manage this pain.

BACKGROUND

Nurses are increasingly involved in consultations regarding intrauterine contraception. However, concerns regarding painful or difficult insertion may inhibit uptake and discourage nurses from promoting or inserting intrauterine contraception.

DESIGN

Integrative review.

METHODS

Database searches of CINAHL, PubMed, Wiley Online Library and the Cochrane Collaboration for relevant literature. Eight papers met the inclusion criteria and were analysed using an integrative review process.

RESULTS

Physical causes and pharmacological interventions for insertion pain have been thoroughly investigated. Absence of previous vaginal delivery and anxiety may increase the likelihood of procedural pain. The literature fails to conclusively determine any universally effective prophylactic analgesia. Cervical anaesthesia may be beneficial in some cases and oral analgesia may relieve postprocedural pain. Distraction in the form of conversation, music or television can be effective in reducing anxiety.

CONCLUSIONS

A combination of physical, psychological and environmental factors contribute to the individual's pain experience. Nurses have the potential to make a significant impact on pain outcomes by demonstrating clinical expertise and creating a trustful environment. Giving reliable information, acknowledging the significance of anxiety and providing reassurance and distraction are effective pain reducing strategies. Research into nonpharmacological approaches is warranted, especially those which reduce anxiety.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Increasing uptake of long-acting reversible contraception is a public health goal. Providing effective pain management strategies to improve patient experience may encourage more nurses to recommend, or enhance their scope of practice to include, intrauterine contraception insertion.

Canadian Contraception Consensus (Part 3 of 4): Chapter 7--Intrauterine Contraception

OBJECTIVE

To provide guidelines for health care providers on the use of contraceptive methods to prevent pregnancy and on the promotion of healthy sexuality.

OUTCOMES

Overall efficacy of cited contraceptive methods, assessing reduction in pregnancy rate, safety, ease of use, and side effects; the effect of cited contraceptive methods on sexual health and general well-being; and the relative cost and availability of cited contraceptive methods in Canada.

EVIDENCE

Published literature was retrieved through searches of Medline and The Cochrane Database from January 1994 to January 2015 using appropriate controlled vocabulary (e.g., contraception, sexuality, sexual health) and key words (e.g., contraception, family planning, hormonal contraception, emergency contraception). Results were restricted to systematic reviews, randomized control trials/controlled clinical trials, and observational studies published in English from January 1994 to January 2015. Searches were updated on a regular basis in incorporated in the guideline to June 2015. Grey (unpublished) literature was identified through searching the websites of health technology assessment and health technology-related agencies, clinical practice guideline collections, clinical trial registries, and national and international medical specialty societies.

VALUES

The quality of the evidence in this document was rated using the criteria described in the Report of the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care (Table 1). CHAPTER 7: INTRAUTERINE CONTRACEPTION:

SUMMARY STATEMENTS

1. Intrauterine contraceptives are as effective as permanent contraception methods. (II-2) 2. The use of levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) 52 mg by patients taking tamoxifen is not associated with recurrence of breast cancer. (I) 3. Intrauterine contraceptives have a number of noncontraceptive benefits. The levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) 52 mg significantly decreases menstrual blood loss (I) and dysmenorrhea. (II-2) Both the copper intrauterine device and the LNG-IUS significantly decrease the risk of endometrial cancer. (II-2) 4. The risk of uterine perforation decreases with inserter experience but is higher in postpartum and breastfeeding women. (II-2) 5. The risk of pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) is increased slightly in the first month after intrauterine contraceptive (IUC) insertion, but the absolute risk is low. Exposure to sexually transmitted infections and not the IUC itself is responsible for PID occurring after the first month of use. (II-2) 6. Nulliparity is not associated with an increased risk of intrauterine contraceptive expulsion. (II-2) 7. Ectopic pregnancy with an intrauterine contraceptive (IUC) is rare, but when a pregnancy occurs with an IUC in situ, it is an ectopic pregnancy in 15% to 50% of the cases. (II-2) 8. In women who conceive with an intrauterine contraceptive (IUC) in place, early IUC removal improves outcomes but does not entirely eliminate risks. (II-2) 9. Intrauterine contraceptives do not increase the risk of infertility. (II-2) 10. Immediate insertion of an intrauterine contraceptive (10 minutes postplacental to 48 hours) postpartum or post-Caesarean section is associated with a higher continuation rate compared with insertion at 6 weeks postpartum. (I) 11. Immediate insertion of an intrauterine contraceptive (IUC; 10 minutes postplacental to 48 hours) postpartum or post-Caesarean section is associated with a higher risk of expulsion. (I) The benefit of inserting an IUC immediately postpartum or post-Caesarean section outweighs the disadvantages of increased risk of perforation and expulsion. (II-C) 12. Insertion of an intrauterine contraceptive in breastfeeding women is associated with a higher risk of uterine perforation in the first postpartum year. (II-2) 13. Immediate insertion of an intrauterine contraceptive (IUC) post-abortion significantly reduces the risk of repeat abortion (II-2) and increases IUC continuation rates at 6 months. (I) 14. Antibiotic prophylaxis for intrauterine contraceptive insertion does not significantly reduce postinsertion pelvic infection. (I) RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Health care professionals should be careful not to restrict access to intrauterine contraceptives (IUC) owing to theoretical or unproven risks. (III-A) Health care professionals should offer IUCs as a first-line method of contraception to both nulliparous and multiparous women. (II-2A) 2. In women seeking intrauterine contraception (IUC) and presenting with heavy menstrual bleeding and/or dysmenorrhea, health care professionals should consider the use of the levonorgestrel intrauterine system 52 mg over other IUCs. (I-A) 3. Patients with breast cancer taking tamoxifen may consider a levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system 52 mg after consultation with their oncologist. (I-A) 4. Women requesting a levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system or a copper-intrauterine device should be counseled regarding changes in bleeding patterns, sexually transmitted infection risk, and duration of use. (III-A) 5. A health care professional should be reasonably certain that the woman is not pregnant prior to inserting an intrauterine contraceptive at any time during the menstrual cycle. (III-A) 6. Health care providers should consider inserting an intrauterine contraceptive immediately after an induced abortion rather than waiting for an interval insertion. (I-B) 7. In women who conceive with an intrauterine contraceptive (IUC) in place, the diagnosis of ectopic pregnancy should be excluded as arly as possible. (II-2A) Once an ectopic pregnancy has been excluded, the IUC should be removed without an invasive procedure. The IUC may be removed at the time of a surgical termination. (II-2B) 8. In the case of pelvic inflammatory disease, it is not necessary to remove the intrauterine contraceptive unless there is no clinical improvement after 48 to 72 hours of appropriate antibiotic treatment. (II-2B) 9. Routine antibiotic prophylaxis for intrauterine contraceptive (IUC) insertion is not indicated. (I-B) Health care providers should perform sexually transmitted infection (STI) testing in women at high risk of STI at the time of IUC insertion. If the test is positive for chlamydia and/or gonorrhea, the woman should be appropriately treated postinsertion and the IUC can remain in situ. (II-2B) 10. Unscheduled bleeding in intrauterine contraception users, when persistent or associated with pelvic pain, should be investigated to rule out infection, pregnancy, gynecological pathology, expulsion or malposition. (III-A)