PainPhase 4SOPHINCT02352714
Study of Pain Control With Hormonal IUS Insertion
A Phase 4 study testing Paracervical Nerve Block in people with Pain, run by Children's Hospital of Philadelphia at 3 sites in United States.
Trial summary
This study aims to compare pain during insertion of the Skyla® IUS using a 100mm visual analog scale (VAS) among 92 young women aged 14 to 22 years randomized to receive a paracervical (n=46) block versus a sham paracervical block (n=46). Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 14 to 22 years, women onlyHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Pain
- What is being tested?
- Paracervical Nerve Block
- Could I receive a placebo?
- Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
- How many people
- 98 participants
- Where
- 3 sitesUnited States
- Study dates
- Jan 2015to Jul 2016
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
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 14 to 22 years
- Women only
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Child, Adult
Who may be able to join
- Nulliparous (i.e., no pregnancy > 24 weeks)
- Not currently pregnant
- Not pregnant in the past 6 weeks
- Willing to be randomized to a paracervical nerve block or sham paracervical block group
- Interested in using an intrauterine system (IUS)
- Able to read and provide written informed consent in English
Who cannot join
- An allergy, hypersensitivity, or absolute medical contra-indication to using lidocaine, other amino-amide local anesthetics, or to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agents, such as ibuprofen
- A history of epilepsy or peptic ulcer disease
- Moderate to severe asthma that precludes non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) use
- Hepatic or renal failure
- Moderate to severe cardiac disease
- Previous use of an IUS or a history of a prior failed IUS insertion
Show all 12Show fewer
- Use of a narcotic or benzodiazepine in the past 24 hours
- Positive pregnancy test or reasonable risk of pregnancy
- Current cervicitis
- Intrauterine infection in the past 90 days
- Meet Centers for Disease Control Medical Eligibility Criteria (MEC) category 3 or 4 classification for IUS use
- Currently breastfeeding
Trial locations and contacts
3 sites in 1 country.
United States3 sites
The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19104
The Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19104
Thomas Jefferson University Hospitals
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19107
About this study
Official title: Study of Pain Control With Hormonal IUS Insertion (SOPHI Study)
This study aims to compare pain during insertion of the Skyla® IUS using a 100mm visual analog scale (VAS) among 92 young women aged 14 to 22 years randomized to receive a paracervical (n=46) block versus a sham paracervical block (n=46).
Read the detailed description
Intrauterine systems (IUS) are among the most effective forms of reversible contraception. Numerous studies demonstrate their safety and efficacy. Despite this, uptake of IUSs among U.S. young women aged 14 to 22 years has been low. Increasing the use of this effective, long acting contraception among young women is an important public health goal, as it could help to reduce the high rates of unintended pregnancies in this population.
A major barrier to young women's utilization of IUSs is fear of pain during insertion. Unfortunately, studies evaluating methods of pain control during IUS insertion have focused on adult women, leaving the question unanswered as to the best pain management method for young women. Compared to adult women, young women have less experience with pelvic exams and may therefore derive greater benefit from pain control measures during gynecologic procedures, such as IUS insertions. Young women and their providers are seeking effective pain control options; yet, there is a lack of high quality, comparative effectiveness research to guide decision making. This proposal seeks to fill this important gap.
With the introduction of the Skyla IUS (Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals, Inc.) to the U.S. market in January 2013, a new approach to pain management became possible. Skyla is smaller than existing IUSs and may therefore cause less pain during insertion. The pain response triggered during Skyla insertion may be better controlled by existing pain control options. This is the underlying premise of this study.
In addition to the size of an IUS, theoretical and empirical data suggest that paracervical blocks have the greatest promise for pain control during IUS insertion compared to other pain control options. Paracervical infiltration of a local anesthetic into the cervix interrupts the visceral sensory fibers of the lower uterus, cervix, and upper vagina. Data from several clinical trials indicate that paracervical blocks provide clinically significant control of pain during multiple types of gynecologic procedures. One recently published study evaluated the effectiveness of paracervical blocks during IUS insertion and found a marginally significant reduction in pain, but the study was underpowered and focused on adult women. The value of a paracervical block in young women receiving an IUS remains unclear.
The investigator propose to conduct a randomized, controlled single-blind trial comparing pain with Skyla IUS insertion among young women aged 14 to 22 years randomized to receive a paracervical block versus a sham cervical block. This study will provide important information for counseling young women about pain management during IUS insertion.
- Conditions
- Pain
- Being tested
- Paracervical Nerve Block, Sham Paracervical Block
- Keywords
- Adolescents, Women's Health, Contraception, Reproduction, Comparative Effectiveness Research, Pregnancy Prevention, Intrauterine Device
- Medical subject headings
- Pain
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Paracervical Nerve BlockDrug
Also called 1 % Lidocaine
Block randomization to receive lidocaine paracervical nerve block vs sham cervical block
Sham Paracervical BlockDrug
Also called Blunt End of a Q-Tip
Block randomization to receive lidocaine paracervical nerve block vs sham cervical block
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Paracervical Nerve Block | Active comparator | Ten milliliters of 1% lidocaine paracervical anesthetic will be injected at three cervical locations: 1 mL at the tenaculum site (12 o'clock on a clock face) and 4.5 mL each at the 4 o'clock and 8 o'clock positions. A 3 minute waiting period will be used between the administration of the paracervical nerve block and the insertion of IUS to allow the paracervical block to take effect. Receives: Drug: Paracervical Nerve Block |
| Sham Paracervical Block | Sham comparator | To perform the sham cervical block, the cervix will be touched with the blunt end of a Q-tip at the three locations described above for the paracervical block. The cervical mucosa will not be broken during the sham block. A 3 minute waiting period will again occur between administration of the sham block and IUS insertion to be consistent with the procedure used for the nerve block. Receives: Drug: Sham Paracervical Block |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Self-reported pain
The primary outcome will be assessed using a visual analogue scale (VAS). Assessment will occur at the time of the insertion of the IUS device. The IUS will be placed according to manufacturer's recommendation.
Measured: Intraoperative (At the time of insertion of the IUS)
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted2 Feb 2015 (estimated)
- Study startJan 2015
- Primary completionJul 2016
- Study completionJul 2016
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (23)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for PainStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Children's Hospital of PhiladelphiaThe 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
- Supportive care
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Participant
- Enrolment
- 98 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Children's Hospital of Philadelphia
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Bayer, University of Pennsylvania
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Aletha Y Akers, MD, MPH, Principal investigator, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02352714
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 14-011286
- Acronym
- SOPHI
- Status last verified
- Sep 2018
- First submitted
- 22 Jan 2015
- Last updated
- 14 Sep 2018
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Kavanaugh ML, Jerman J, Hubacher D, Kost K, Finer LB. Characteristics of women in the United States who use long-acting reversible contraceptive methods. Obstet Gynecol. 2011 Jun;117(6):1349-1357. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e31821c47c9.
PubMed 21606745Finer LB, Jerman J, Kavanaugh ML. Changes in use of long-acting contraceptive methods in the United States, 2007-2009. Fertil Steril. 2012 Oct;98(4):893-7. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.06.027. Epub 2012 Jul 13.
PubMed 22795639Finer LB. Unintended pregnancy among U.S. adolescents: accounting for sexual activity. J Adolesc Health. 2010 Sep;47(3):312-4. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2010.02.002. Epub 2010 Apr 9.
PubMed 20708573Kavanaugh ML, Frohwirth L, Jerman J, Popkin R, Ethier K. Long-acting reversible contraception for adolescents and young adults: patient and provider perspectives. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2013 Apr;26(2):86-95. doi: 10.1016/j.jpag.2012.10.006. Epub 2012 Dec 31.
PubMed 23287602Hubacher D, Reyes V, Lillo S, Zepeda A, Chen PL, Croxatto H. Pain from copper intrauterine device insertion: randomized trial of prophylactic ibuprofen. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006 Nov;195(5):1272-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2006.08.022.
PubMed 17074548Massey SE, Varady JC, Henzl MR. Pain relief with naproxen following insertion of an intrauterine device. J Reprod Med. 1974 Dec;13(6):226-31. No abstract available.
PubMed 4612152Heikinheimo O, Inki P, Kunz M, Parmhed S, Anttila AM, Olsson SE, Hurskainen R, Gemzell-Danielsson K. Double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study on the effect of misoprostol on ease of consecutive insertion of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system. Contraception. 2010 Jun;81(6):481-6. doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2010.01.020. Epub 2010 Mar 1.
PubMed 20472114Dijkhuizen K, Dekkers OM, Holleboom CA, de Groot CJ, Hellebrekers BW, van Roosmalen GJ, Janssen CA, Helmerhorst FM. Vaginal misoprostol prior to insertion of an intrauterine device: an RCT. Hum Reprod. 2011 Feb;26(2):323-9. doi: 10.1093/humrep/deq348. Epub 2010 Dec 15.
PubMed 21159683Edelman AB, Schaefer E, Olson A, Van Houten L, Bednarek P, Leclair C, Jensen JT. Effects of prophylactic misoprostol administration prior to intrauterine device insertion in nulliparous women. Contraception. 2011 Sep;84(3):234-9. doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2011.01.016. Epub 2011 Mar 3.
PubMed 21843686Mody SK, Kiley J, Rademaker A, Gawron L, Stika C, Hammond C. Pain control for intrauterine device insertion: a randomized trial of 1% lidocaine paracervical block. Contraception. 2012 Dec;86(6):704-9. doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2012.06.004. Epub 2012 Jul 6.
PubMed 22770792Bednarek PH, Micks EA, Edelman AB, Li H, Jensen JT. The effect of nitroprusside on IUD insertion experience in nulliparous women: a pilot study. Contraception. 2013 Apr;87(4):421-5. doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2012.10.030. Epub 2012 Dec 4.
PubMed 23218853McNicholas CP, Madden T, Zhao Q, Secura G, Allsworth JE, Peipert JF. Cervical lidocaine for IUD insertional pain: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012 Nov;207(5):384.e1-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2012.09.018. Epub 2012 Sep 20.
PubMed 23107081Tangsiriwatthana T, Sangkomkamhang US, Lumbiganon P, Laopaiboon M. Paracervical local anaesthesia for cervical dilatation and uterine intervention. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009 Jan 21;(1):CD005056. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005056.pub2.
PubMed 19160245Ahmad G, Duffy J, Watson AJ. Pain relief in hysterosalpingography. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007 Apr 18;(2):CD006106. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006106.pub2.
PubMed 17443612Renner RM, Jensen JT, Nichols MD, Edelman AB. Pain control in first-trimester surgical abortion: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Contraception. 2010 May;81(5):372-88. doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2009.12.008. Epub 2010 Jan 27.
PubMed 20399943
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 14 Sep 2018. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Study of Pain Control With Hormonal IUS Insertion (SOPHI Study)
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02352714
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- SOPHI / 14-011286
- Conditions
- Pain
- Keywords
- Adolescents, Women's Health, Contraception, Reproduction, Comparative Effectiveness Research, Pregnancy Prevention, Intrauterine Device
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 98 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Children's Hospital of PhiladelphiaUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Bayer, University of Pennsylvania
- Study start
- Jan 2015
- Primary completion
- Jul 2016 (actual)
- Study completion
- Jul 2016 (actual)
- First posted
- 2 Feb 2015 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This study aims to compare pain during insertion of the Skyla® IUS using a 100mm visual analog scale (VAS) among 92 young women aged 14 to 22 years randomized to receive a paracervical (n=46) block versus a sham paracervical block (n=46).
Detailed description
Intrauterine systems (IUS) are among the most effective forms of reversible contraception. Numerous studies demonstrate their safety and efficacy. Despite this, uptake of IUSs among U.S. young women aged 14 to 22 years has been low. Increasing the use of this effective, long acting contraception among young women is an important public health goal, as it could help to reduce the high rates of unintended pregnancies in this population.
A major barrier to young women's utilization of IUSs is fear of pain during insertion. Unfortunately, studies evaluating methods of pain control during IUS insertion have focused on adult women, leaving the question unanswered as to the best pain management method for young women. Compared to adult women, young women have less experience with pelvic exams and may therefore derive greater benefit from pain control measures during gynecologic procedures, such as IUS insertions. Young women and their providers are seeking effective pain control options; yet, there is a lack of high quality, comparative effectiveness research to guide decision making. This proposal seeks to fill this important gap.
With the introduction of the Skyla IUS (Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals, Inc.) to the U.S. market in January 2013, a new approach to pain management became possible. Skyla is smaller than existing IUSs and may therefore cause less pain during insertion. The pain response triggered during Skyla insertion may be better controlled by existing pain control options. This is the underlying premise of this study.
In addition to the size of an IUS, theoretical and empirical data suggest that paracervical blocks have the greatest promise for pain control during IUS insertion compared to other pain control options. Paracervical infiltration of a local anesthetic into the cervix interrupts the visceral sensory fibers of the lower uterus, cervix, and upper vagina. Data from several clinical trials indicate that paracervical blocks provide clinically significant control of pain during multiple types of gynecologic procedures. One recently published study evaluated the effectiveness of paracervical blocks during IUS insertion and found a marginally significant reduction in pain, but the study was underpowered and focused on adult women. The value of a paracervical block in young women receiving an IUS remains unclear.
The investigator propose to conduct a randomized, controlled single-blind trial comparing pain with Skyla IUS insertion among young women aged 14 to 22 years randomized to receive a paracervical block versus a sham cervical block. This study will provide important information for counseling young women about pain management during IUS insertion.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Supportive care
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (participant)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Paracervical Nerve Block | Active comparator | Drug: Paracervical Nerve BlockTen milliliters of 1% lidocaine paracervical anesthetic will be injected at three cervical locations: 1 mL at the tenaculum site (12 o'clock on a clock face) and 4.5 mL each at the 4 o'clock and 8 o'clock positions. A 3 minute waiting period will be used between the administration of the paracervical nerve block and the insertion of IUS to allow the paracervical block to take effect. |
| Sham Paracervical Block | Sham comparator | Drug: Sham Paracervical BlockTo perform the sham cervical block, the cervix will be touched with the blunt end of a Q-tip at the three locations described above for the paracervical block. The cervical mucosa will not be broken during the sham block. A 3 minute waiting period will again occur between administration of the sham block and IUS insertion to be consistent with the procedure used for the nerve block. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 14 to 22 years
- Sex
- Female only
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult
Key inclusion criteria (6 listed)
- Nulliparous (i.e., no pregnancy > 24 weeks)
- Not currently pregnant
- Not pregnant in the past 6 weeks
- Willing to be randomized to a paracervical nerve block or sham paracervical block group
- Interested in using an intrauterine system (IUS)
Key exclusion criteria (12 listed)
- An allergy, hypersensitivity, or absolute medical contra-indication to using lidocaine, other amino-amide local anesthetics, or to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agents, such as ibuprofen
- A history of epilepsy or peptic ulcer disease
- Moderate to severe asthma that precludes non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) use
- Hepatic or renal failure
- Moderate to severe cardiac disease
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Paracervical Nerve BlockAlso: 1 % LidocaineBlock randomization to receive lidocaine paracervical nerve block vs sham cervical block | Drug | Paracervical Nerve Block |
| Sham Paracervical BlockAlso: Blunt End of a Q-TipBlock randomization to receive lidocaine paracervical nerve block vs sham cervical block | Drug | Sham Paracervical Block |
Primary outcome
Self-reported pain
Time frame: Intraoperative (At the time of insertion of the IUS)
The primary outcome will be assessed using a visual analogue scale (VAS). Assessment will occur at the time of the insertion of the IUS device. The IUS will be placed according to manufacturer's recommendation.
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 14 Sep 2018.
- Background: PubMed 21606745Kavanaugh ML, Jerman J, Hubacher D, Kost K, Finer LB. Characteristics of women in the United States who use long-acting reversible contraceptive methods. Obstet Gynecol. 2011 Jun;117(6):1349-1357. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e31821c47c9.
- Background: PubMed 22795639Finer LB, Jerman J, Kavanaugh ML. Changes in use of long-acting contraceptive methods in the United States, 2007-2009. Fertil Steril. 2012 Oct;98(4):893-7. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.06.027. Epub 2012 Jul 13.
- Background: PubMed 20708573Finer LB. Unintended pregnancy among U.S. adolescents: accounting for sexual activity. J Adolesc Health. 2010 Sep;47(3):312-4. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2010.02.002. Epub 2010 Apr 9.
- Background: PubMed 23287602Kavanaugh ML, Frohwirth L, Jerman J, Popkin R, Ethier K. Long-acting reversible contraception for adolescents and young adults: patient and provider perspectives. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2013 Apr;26(2):86-95. doi: 10.1016/j.jpag.2012.10.006. Epub 2012 Dec 31.
- Background: PubMed 17074548Hubacher D, Reyes V, Lillo S, Zepeda A, Chen PL, Croxatto H. Pain from copper intrauterine device insertion: randomized trial of prophylactic ibuprofen. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006 Nov;195(5):1272-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2006.08.022.
- Background: PubMed 4612152Massey SE, Varady JC, Henzl MR. Pain relief with naproxen following insertion of an intrauterine device. J Reprod Med. 1974 Dec;13(6):226-31. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 20472114Heikinheimo O, Inki P, Kunz M, Parmhed S, Anttila AM, Olsson SE, Hurskainen R, Gemzell-Danielsson K. Double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study on the effect of misoprostol on ease of consecutive insertion of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system. Contraception. 2010 Jun;81(6):481-6. doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2010.01.020. Epub 2010 Mar 1.
- Background: PubMed 21159683Dijkhuizen K, Dekkers OM, Holleboom CA, de Groot CJ, Hellebrekers BW, van Roosmalen GJ, Janssen CA, Helmerhorst FM. Vaginal misoprostol prior to insertion of an intrauterine device: an RCT. Hum Reprod. 2011 Feb;26(2):323-9. doi: 10.1093/humrep/deq348. Epub 2010 Dec 15.
- Background: PubMed 21843686Edelman AB, Schaefer E, Olson A, Van Houten L, Bednarek P, Leclair C, Jensen JT. Effects of prophylactic misoprostol administration prior to intrauterine device insertion in nulliparous women. Contraception. 2011 Sep;84(3):234-9. doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2011.01.016. Epub 2011 Mar 3.
- Background: PubMed 22770792Mody SK, Kiley J, Rademaker A, Gawron L, Stika C, Hammond C. Pain control for intrauterine device insertion: a randomized trial of 1% lidocaine paracervical block. Contraception. 2012 Dec;86(6):704-9. doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2012.06.004. Epub 2012 Jul 6.
- Background: PubMed 23218853Bednarek PH, Micks EA, Edelman AB, Li H, Jensen JT. The effect of nitroprusside on IUD insertion experience in nulliparous women: a pilot study. Contraception. 2013 Apr;87(4):421-5. doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2012.10.030. Epub 2012 Dec 4.
- Background: PubMed 23107081McNicholas CP, Madden T, Zhao Q, Secura G, Allsworth JE, Peipert JF. Cervical lidocaine for IUD insertional pain: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012 Nov;207(5):384.e1-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2012.09.018. Epub 2012 Sep 20.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Pain
Not yet recruiting
Digital Use, 24-Hour Movement Behaviors, and Myofascial Release in University Students With Neck Pain
Forward Head Posture, Chronic Nonspecific Neck Pain
Recruiting
Effects of Virtual Reality Exergames Versus Spinal Manipulation in Chronic Nonspecific Low Back Pain
Chronic Nonspecific Low-back Pain, CNSLBP
Recruiting
Dietary Intervention for Migraine Relief
Migraine
RecruitingPhase 4
Anrikefon-based Patient-controlled Intravenous Analgesia Following Laparoscopic Surgery
Laparoscopic Surgery, Visceral Pain, Postoperative
Not yet recruiting
Ultrasound-Guided Radiofrequency Ablation for Focal Adenomyosis
Adenomyosis, Adenomyoma of Uterus
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.
Aletha Y Akers, MD, MPH principal investigator
Children's Hospital of Philadelphia
3 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 4 study testing Paracervical Nerve Block in people with Pain, run by Children's Hospital of Philadelphia at 3 sites 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 6 inclusion and 12 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: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 14 Sep 2018. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 3 sites 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. Some participants in this study may receive a placebo. 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?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
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?
Self-reported pain (time frame: Intraoperative (At the time of insertion of the IUS)). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT02352714, which also lists 23 linked publications.
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 14 Sep 2018.