Back to Journals » Patient Preference and Adherence » Volume 7

Confirmation test for hysteroscopic sterilization: a descriptive study of patient tolerability and impressions

Authors Chapa HO, Venegas G

Published 31 March 2013 Volume 2013:7 Pages 269—274

Hector O Chapa, Gonzalo Venegas

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Methodist Medical and Women’s Specialty Center, Dallas, TX, USA

Background: This retrospective descriptive study describes patient follow-up and tolerability of the post-hysteroscopic sterilization confirmation test.
Methods: Recruitment for the original sterilization procedure was from January 2008 to March 2009; subsequent confirmation test (hysterosalpingogram) capture was from March 2008 to July 2009. Patients were given a 10 cm visual analog pain scale during the hysteroscopic sterilization procedure, and took the scale with them as a take-home sheet. Following hysterosalpingography (HSG), patients received a follow-up phone call within 24 hours, and were asked to rate their pain during the hysterosalpingogram as well as during the first 2 hours following the test.
Results: Eighty-nine hysteroscopic sterilizations were performed under local paracervical block and oral nonsteroidal medication. The median immediate post-sterilization visual analog pain score was 1.9 (range 1.7–2.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.3–1.5). Of the 89 sterilization procedures, 79% (n = 70) patients underwent a confirmation test using HSG. Ten percent (n = 7) of the hysterosalpinograms were performed at least 3 months after sterilization (mean 17 [range 14–20] weeks). Median intratest visual analog pain score overall (n = 70) was 1.8 (range 1.6–1.9, 95% CI 1.5–1.9). Following the test, the median visual analog pain score was 1.7 (range 1.6–1.9, 95% CI 1.4–0.18). Of the 70 patients who participated in visual analog pain score capture, 64 had a paper copy of the scale had six had it via email. Of the 19 who did not complete hysterosalpinography, five were lost to follow-up. Reasons given by the remaining 14 for noncompliance with hysterosalpinography were: a busy schedule/childcare issues (62%), fear of the test (13%), trust in the sterilization procedure alone (13%), and forgetting the appointment (12%). Of the 70 HSGs performed, 69 revealed satisfactory micro insert positions with bilateral occlusion; one was unilaterally patent at 13 weeks post-sterilization, with satisfactory micro insert position. Repeat testing 10 weeks later documented bilateral occlusion.
Conclusion: Confirmation testing for hysteroscopic sterilization is well tolerated, with favorable patient impressions after completion.

Keywords: female permanent birth control, female sterilization, Essure confirmation test, contraception

Download Article [PDF] 

Readers of this article also read:

Emerging and future therapies for hemophilia

Carr ME, Tortella BJ

Journal of Blood Medicine 2015, 6:245-255

Published Date: 3 September 2015

Green synthesis of water-soluble nontoxic polymeric nanocomposites containing silver nanoparticles

Prozorova GF, Pozdnyakov AS, Kuznetsova NP, Korzhova SA, Emel’yanov AI, Ermakova TG, Fadeeva TV, Sosedova LM

International Journal of Nanomedicine 2014, 9:1883-1889

Published Date: 16 April 2014

Methacrylic-based nanogels for the pH-sensitive delivery of 5-Fluorouracil in the colon

Ashwanikumar N, Kumar NA, Nair SA, Kumar GS

International Journal of Nanomedicine 2012, 7:5769-5779

Published Date: 15 November 2012

A novel preparation method for silicone oil nanoemulsions and its application for coating hair with silicone

Hu Z, Liao M, Chen Y, Cai Y, Meng L, Liu Y, Lv N, Liu Z, Yuan W

International Journal of Nanomedicine 2012, 7:5719-5724

Published Date: 12 November 2012

Cross-linked acrylic hydrogel for the controlled delivery of hydrophobic drugs in cancer therapy

Deepa G, Thulasidasan AK, Anto RJ, Pillai JJ, Kumar GS

International Journal of Nanomedicine 2012, 7:4077-4088

Published Date: 27 July 2012

Crystallization after intravitreal ganciclovir injection

Pitipol Choopong, Nattaporn Tesavibul, Nattawut Rodanant

Clinical Ophthalmology 2010, 4:709-711

Published Date: 14 July 2010