Undesired Intrauterine PregnancyPhase 4NCT01011634
Trial Comparing Intravenous and Oral Moderate Sedation for First Trimester Surgical Abortions
A Phase 4 study testing Intravenous moderate sedation versus oral medication in people with Undesired Intrauterine Pregnancy and First Trimester Pregnancy, run by University of California, San Francisco at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
In the United States, the majority of first-trimester surgical abortions are performed in outpatient clinics that utilize a wide variety of oral and intravenous regimens for pain control. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 16 to 55 years, women onlyHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Undesired Intrauterine Pregnancy, First Trimester Pregnancy
- What is being tested?
- Intravenous moderate sedation versus oral medication
- Type of treatment
- Pill or oral medicine, Injection or infusion
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 18 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- May 2007to Nov 2008
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 16 to 55 years
- Women only
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Child, Adult
Who may be able to join
- Intrauterine pregnancy <12 weeks gestation (as confirmed by ultrasound)
- Ability to undergo outpatient abortion without an anesthesiologist
- Age ≥ 16 years old
- Informed consent prior to participation in study
- English or Spanish language capacity (or staff or professional translator available for all study procedures)
Who cannot join
- Possible ectopic pregnancy
- Known allergy to study medications or misoprostol
- Current unstable psychiatric disorder
- Current alcohol/drug/narcotic/benzodiazepine/barbituate dependence within the previous 2 months
- Weight < 50 kg
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
San Francisco General Hospital
San Francisco, California, 94110
About this study
Official title: A Double Blinded, Placebo-controlled Randomized Control Trial Comparing Intravenous Moderate Sedation and Oral/Sublingual Analgesia/Anxiolysis for First Trimester Surgical Abortions
In the United States, the majority of first-trimester surgical abortions are performed in outpatient clinics that utilize a wide variety of oral and intravenous regimens for pain control. The specific aim of this study is to evaluate the equivalency of intravenous moderate sedation (fentanyl 100 mcg and midazolam 2 mg) versus oral analgesia/anxiolysis (lorazepam 2 mg sublingual, hydrocodone/acetaminophen 5/500 mg, and ibuprofen 800 mg) for first-trimester surgical abortions. The investigators hypothesize that oral moderate sedation and intravenous moderate sedation will be equivalent in controlling pain as measured by a difference of +/- 10 on a 100-point (range 0-100) visual analog pain scale.
Read the detailed description
Approximately 50% of pregnancies in the United States are unintended and about 50% of these end in an induced abortion. In 2000, approximately 1.31 million abortions were performed in the United States, approximately 88% of which were less than 12 weeks gestational age. There has been a movement toward performing elective abortions in the ambulatory care setting; however this can provide a dilemma in terms of the procedural anesthesia. In fact, general anesthesia for induced abortions has been associated with an increased incidence of complications and death.5
The paracervical block (PCB) alone has been shown to reduce pain from cervical dilation and tenaculum placement. Slower injection and greater volume have been associated with greater pain control, possibly related to an effect on tissue distension as well as to nerve blockade.6,7,8 However, women's perception of pain continues to be significant with PCB alone.
A majority of high-volume first trimester providers (abortion clinics) offer intravenous moderate sedation. However, many individual practitioners are limited in their ability to provide outpatient moderate sedation, and research has shown mixed results about its efficacy. There continues to be a dilemma in terms of what constitutes optimal anesthesia for first trimester abortions to maximize pain control and minimize side effects and duration of hospital/clinic stay for the patients. A randomized, double blind, placebo controlled trial of intravenous fentanyl (50-100 mcg) with local anesthesia versus placebo and local anesthesia alone in 368 participants found that fentanyl, when compared with placebo, reduced the pain of first trimester abortion by 1.0 point on an 11-point verbal numerical scale. The investigators concluded that this pain reduction was of questionable clinical significance and less than what study participants desired (2.0 points). Another randomized, double blind, placebo controlled study in 100 participants compared local anesthesia alone to local anesthesia with intravenous fentanyl (25mcg) and midazolam (2mg) for first trimester suction curettage. There was no statistically significant difference in pain scores between the groups. However, patients who received intravenous sedation reported increased satisfaction with their abortion procedure.11
There is some evidence of good pain control with oral and sublingual analgesia. Preliminary data from a study performed at the UCSF Mt. Zion Women's Options Clinic between 11/04 and 12/05 (Meckstroth H10873-25519) of 120 women undergoing first trimester abortions who received sublingual lorazepam, ibuprofen, and cervical block revealed that 84.5% of patients reported their pain as acceptable during the procedure with 4.8% considering their pain level unacceptable and 10.7% unsure.
Considering barriers to abortion access, developing an adequate medication regimen that does not require the monitoring and expense of moderate sedation could be very helpful in encouraging more providers to offer abortion. . Given that many patients pay directly for abortions, increasing the cost of services can be prohibitive for many women. Oral medications may also be more appealing to patients seeking sedation but who are fearful of needles. We hope to demonstrate that pain will be adequately controlled with sublingual lorazepam and oral ibuprofen- ideal medications for the clinic setting.
Currently, the standard of care in the SFGH Women's Option Center is moderate sedation with IV fentanyl and midazolam. We will conduct a randomized control trial to evaluate moderate sedation vs. sublingual lorazepam, oral ibuprofen, and hydrocodone/acetaminophen to assess pain control and satisfaction in patients undergoing first trimester abortions. Both groups will receive local cervical block analgesia.
The proposed study is a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial to be conducted at the San Francisco General Hospital (SFGH) Women's Options Center evaluating the equivalency of intravenous moderate sedation (fentanyl 100 mcg plus midazolam 2 mg) vs oral analgesia/anxiolysis (lorazepam 2 mg sublingual, hydrocodone/acetominophen 5/500 mg, and ibuprofen 800 mg) for first trimester surgical abortions.
The study participants will be derived from the SFGH Women's Options Center. On average, the SFGH Women's Options Center performs about 2200 abortions per year, of which 50% are in the first trimester, and intravenous moderate sedation is currently the standard pain control regimen, utilized in nearly 100% of procedures. In the SFGH's sister clinic at Mt. Zion and at Planned Parenthood Golden Gate and its affiliates, various regimes of oral analgesia/anxiolysis are utilized instead. Both are considered standard of care for early abortion both locally and nationally.
- Being tested
- Intravenous moderate sedation versus oral medication
- Keywords
- abortion, uterine aspiration, pain control
- Medical subject headings
- Agnosia
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Intravenous moderate sedation versus oral medicationDrug
Intravenous moderate sedation (fentanyl 100 mcg and midazolam 2 mg) versus oral analgesia/anxiolysis (lorazepam 2 mg sublingual, hydrocodone/acetaminophen 5/500 mg, and ibuprofen 800 mg)
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Moderate sedation | Active comparator | Not described Receives: Drug: Intravenous moderate sedation versus oral medication |
| Oral medication | Active comparator | Not described Receives: Drug: Intravenous moderate sedation versus oral medication |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Pain Score Within 5 Mins After Procedure
Measured: within 5 mins after procedure
Secondary outcomes (1)
Acceptability of Pain, Would They Choose the Same Regimen Again for Another Uterine Aspiration
Measured: 30 min after procedure
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted11 Nov 2009 (estimated)
- Study startMay 2007
- Primary completionNov 2008
- Study completionNov 2008
Why it stopped: 7% enrollment. Study terminated after a small number of recruited patients
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Other trials for Undesired Intrauterine PregnancyStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by University of California, San FranciscoThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Quadruple blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Care provider, Investigator, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 18 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of California, San Francisco
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Pratima Gupta, MD, Principal investigator, University of California, San FranciscoKaren Meckstroth, MD, MD, Principal investigator, University of California, San Francisco
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01011634
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- H10873-28990-01
- Status last verified
- May 2013
- First submitted
- 9 Nov 2009
- Last updated
- 16 May 2013
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 16 May 2013. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- A Double Blinded, Placebo-controlled Randomized Control Trial Comparing Intravenous Moderate Sedation and Oral/Sublingual Analgesia/Anxiolysis for First Trimester Surgical Abortions
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01011634
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- H10873-28990-01
- Keywords
- abortion, uterine aspiration, pain control
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- TerminatedReason stopped: 7% enrollment. Study terminated after a small number of recruited patients
- Enrolment
- 18 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of California, San FranciscoUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- May 2007
- Primary completion
- Nov 2008 (actual)
- Study completion
- Nov 2008 (actual)
- First posted
- 11 Nov 2009 (estimated)
- Results
- Posted 16 May 2013
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
In the United States, the majority of first-trimester surgical abortions are performed in outpatient clinics that utilize a wide variety of oral and intravenous regimens for pain control. The specific aim of this study is to evaluate the equivalency of intravenous moderate sedation (fentanyl 100 mcg and midazolam 2 mg) versus oral analgesia/anxiolysis (lorazepam 2 mg sublingual, hydrocodone/acetaminophen 5/500 mg, and ibuprofen 800 mg) for first-trimester surgical abortions. The investigators hypothesize that oral moderate sedation and intravenous moderate sedation will be equivalent in controlling pain as measured by a difference of +/- 10 on a 100-point (range 0-100) visual analog pain scale.
Detailed description
Approximately 50% of pregnancies in the United States are unintended and about 50% of these end in an induced abortion. In 2000, approximately 1.31 million abortions were performed in the United States, approximately 88% of which were less than 12 weeks gestational age. There has been a movement toward performing elective abortions in the ambulatory care setting; however this can provide a dilemma in terms of the procedural anesthesia. In fact, general anesthesia for induced abortions has been associated with an increased incidence of complications and death.5
The paracervical block (PCB) alone has been shown to reduce pain from cervical dilation and tenaculum placement. Slower injection and greater volume have been associated with greater pain control, possibly related to an effect on tissue distension as well as to nerve blockade.6,7,8 However, women's perception of pain continues to be significant with PCB alone.
A majority of high-volume first trimester providers (abortion clinics) offer intravenous moderate sedation. However, many individual practitioners are limited in their ability to provide outpatient moderate sedation, and research has shown mixed results about its efficacy. There continues to be a dilemma in terms of what constitutes optimal anesthesia for first trimester abortions to maximize pain control and minimize side effects and duration of hospital/clinic stay for the patients. A randomized, double blind, placebo controlled trial of intravenous fentanyl (50-100 mcg) with local anesthesia versus placebo and local anesthesia alone in 368 participants found that fentanyl, when compared with placebo, reduced the pain of first trimester abortion by 1.0 point on an 11-point verbal numerical scale. The investigators concluded that this pain reduction was of questionable clinical significance and less than what study participants desired (2.0 points). Another randomized, double blind, placebo controlled study in 100 participants compared local anesthesia alone to local anesthesia with intravenous fentanyl (25mcg) and midazolam (2mg) for first trimester suction curettage. There was no statistically significant difference in pain scores between the groups. However, patients who received intravenous sedation reported increased satisfaction with their abortion procedure.11
There is some evidence of good pain control with oral and sublingual analgesia. Preliminary data from a study performed at the UCSF Mt. Zion Women's Options Clinic between 11/04 and 12/05 (Meckstroth H10873-25519) of 120 women undergoing first trimester abortions who received sublingual lorazepam, ibuprofen, and cervical block revealed that 84.5% of patients reported their pain as acceptable during the procedure with 4.8% considering their pain level unacceptable and 10.7% unsure.
Considering barriers to abortion access, developing an adequate medication regimen that does not require the monitoring and expense of moderate sedation could be very helpful in encouraging more providers to offer abortion. . Given that many patients pay directly for abortions, increasing the cost of services can be prohibitive for many women. Oral medications may also be more appealing to patients seeking sedation but who are fearful of needles. We hope to demonstrate that pain will be adequately controlled with sublingual lorazepam and oral ibuprofen- ideal medications for the clinic setting.
Currently, the standard of care in the SFGH Women's Option Center is moderate sedation with IV fentanyl and midazolam. We will conduct a randomized control trial to evaluate moderate sedation vs. sublingual lorazepam, oral ibuprofen, and hydrocodone/acetaminophen to assess pain control and satisfaction in patients undergoing first trimester abortions. Both groups will receive local cervical block analgesia.
The proposed study is a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial to be conducted at the San Francisco General Hospital (SFGH) Women's Options Center evaluating the equivalency of intravenous moderate sedation (fentanyl 100 mcg plus midazolam 2 mg) vs oral analgesia/anxiolysis (lorazepam 2 mg sublingual, hydrocodone/acetominophen 5/500 mg, and ibuprofen 800 mg) for first trimester surgical abortions.
The study participants will be derived from the SFGH Women's Options Center. On average, the SFGH Women's Options Center performs about 2200 abortions per year, of which 50% are in the first trimester, and intravenous moderate sedation is currently the standard pain control regimen, utilized in nearly 100% of procedures. In the SFGH's sister clinic at Mt. Zion and at Planned Parenthood Golden Gate and its affiliates, various regimes of oral analgesia/anxiolysis are utilized instead. Both are considered standard of care for early abortion both locally and nationally.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Quadruple blind (participant, care provider, investigator, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Moderate sedation | Active comparator | Drug: Intravenous moderate sedation versus oral medication |
| Oral medication | Active comparator | Drug: Intravenous moderate sedation versus oral medication |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 16 to 55 years
- Sex
- Female only
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult
Key inclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Intrauterine pregnancy <12 weeks gestation (as confirmed by ultrasound)
- Ability to undergo outpatient abortion without an anesthesiologist
- Age ≥ 16 years old
- Informed consent prior to participation in study
- English or Spanish language capacity (or staff or professional translator available for all study procedures)
Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Possible ectopic pregnancy
- Known allergy to study medications or misoprostol
- Current unstable psychiatric disorder
- Current alcohol/drug/narcotic/benzodiazepine/barbituate dependence within the previous 2 months
- Weight < 50 kg
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Intravenous moderate sedation versus oral medicationIntravenous moderate sedation (fentanyl 100 mcg and midazolam 2 mg) versus oral analgesia/anxiolysis (lorazepam 2 mg sublingual, hydrocodone/acetaminophen 5/500 mg, and ibuprofen 800 mg) | Drug | Moderate sedation, Oral medication |
Primary outcome
Pain Score Within 5 Mins After Procedure
Time frame: within 5 mins after procedure
1 secondary outcome
Acceptability of Pain, Would They Choose the Same Regimen Again for Another Uterine Aspiration
Time frame: 30 min after procedure
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 16 May 2013.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Pratima Gupta, MD principal investigator
University of California, San Francisco
Karen Meckstroth, MD, MD principal investigator
University of California, San Francisco
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 4 study testing Intravenous moderate sedation versus oral medication in people with Undesired Intrauterine Pregnancy and First Trimester Pregnancy, run by University of California, San Francisco at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 5 inclusion and 5 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: stopped early, as of the sponsor's last update on 16 May 2013. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
What does this phase mean?
Phase 4 studies take place after a treatment is approved, to learn more about its long-term benefits and risks in everyday use.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 16 May 2013). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Pain Score Within 5 Mins After Procedure (time frame: within 5 mins after procedure). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 16 May 2013.