Non-physician insertion of IUDs: clinical outcomes among TCu380A insertions in three developing-country clinics.

What Was Tested

The paper reports a study of Contraception, published as a randomized controlled trial.

This secondary analysis of TCu380A IUD acceptors collected at clinics in Nigeria, Turkey and Mexico involved 367 women; 193 insertions were performed by physicians and 174 by non-physicians.

Women having their IUD inserted by a non-physician were more likely to experience a pain-free insertion, but also likelier to have the IUD removed for bleeding and pain or to experience an expulsion than women who had their IUD inserted by a physician.

Who Took Part

The study group was 367 women.

By PubMed's age tags, the people studied were adults, women only.

How the Study Was Run

The design is described as randomized.

Random assignment meant chance, not the researchers, decided who got Contraception and who got the comparison, which limits bias.

What Was Measured

This secondary analysis of TCu380A IUD acceptors collected at clinics in Nigeria, Turkey and Mexico involved 367 women; 193 insertions were performed by physicians and 174 by non-physicians.

Topics PubMed links to this paper include Allied Health Personnel, Cervix Uteri, Cohort Studies, Contraception, Developing Countries, Female Urogenital Diseases and Incidence.

What This Means in Plain Language

The paper is a randomized study of Contraception in 367 women.

With several hundred people or more, it is a fairly large study for this kind of research.

The publication is from 1998 (Advances in contraception : the official journal of the Society for the Advancement of Contraception), a journal based in Netherlands.

More context: all human trials.