Original Report| Volume 32, ISSUE 3, P312-315, June 2019

Intrauterine Device Insertion Procedure Duration in Adolescent and Young Adult Women

Published:January 09, 2019DOI:


      Study Objective

      Intrauterine device (IUD) utilization in the United States is low among adolescent and young adult women. Longer procedure duration has been proposed as one potential barrier to IUD insertion in this population. We hypothesized that procedure duration would be longer in adolescents compared to young adult women.

      Design, Setting, and Participants

      This study was a secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial comparing the effectiveness of a lidocaine vs sham paracervical nerve block for pain control during levonorgestrel 13.5 mg IUD insertion. Adolescent and young adult women ages 14-22 years were recruited from 3 outpatient academic sites in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

      Interventions and Main Outcome Measures

      Pain scores were recorded at 7 steps during the procedure from speculum insertion through removal. Time stamps associated with each step were used to calculate the overall procedure duration. Cumulative IUD insertion procedure duration was estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method.


      Ninety-five women enrolled. Nineteen (19/95, 20%) were ages 14-17 and 76 (76/95, 80%) were ages 18-22 years. The median procedure duration (seconds ± interquartile range) was longer for adolescents than for young adults (555 ± 428 seconds vs 383 ± 196 seconds; P = .008). After adjusting for study site, the difference in expected median procedure duration between age groups was not significant (P = .3832).


      The difference in duration of IUD insertion procedures in adolescent and young adult women is not clinically or statistically significant. Providers should not withhold IUDs from appropriate adolescent and young adult women on the basis of age alone.

      Key Words

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to Journal of Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Curtis K.M.
        • Tepper N.K.
        • Jatlaoui T.C.
        • et al.
        U.S. medical eligibility criteria for contraceptive use, 2016.
        MMWR Recomm Rep. 2016; 65: 1
        • Martinez G.M.
        • Abma J.C.
        Sexual activity, contraceptive use, and childbearing of teenagers aged 15-19 in the United States.
        NCHS Data Brief. 2015; 209: 1
        • Abma J.C.
        • Martinez G.M.
        Sexual activity and contraceptive use among teenagers in the United States, 2011-2015.
        Natl Health Stat Rep. 2017; 104: 1
      1. Committee on Adolescent Health Care Long-Acting Reversible Contraception Working Group, The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists: Committee opinion no. 539: adolescents and long-acting reversible contraception: implants and intrauterine devices.
        Obstet Gynecol. 2012; 120: 983
        • Kavanaugh M.L.
        • Frohwirth L.
        • Jerman J.
        • et al.
        Long-acting reversible contraception for adolescents and young adults: patient and provider perspectives.
        J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2013; 26: 86
        • Akers A.Y.
        • Steinway C.
        • Sonalkar S.
        • et al.
        Reducing pain during intrauterine device insertion: a randomized controlled trial in adolescents and young women.
        Obstet Gynecol. 2017; 130: 795
        • Kroenke K.
        • Spitzer R.L.
        • Williams J.B.
        • et al.
        An ultra-brief screening scale for anxiety and depression: the PHQ-4.
        Psychosomatics. 2009; 50: 613
        • Edelman A.B.
        • Schaefer E.
        • Olson A.
        • et al.
        Effects of prophylactic misoprostol administration prior to intrauterine device insertion in nulliparous women.
        Contraception. 2011; 84: 234
        • Aksoy H.
        • Aksoy U.
        • Ozyurt S.
        • et al.
        Lidocaine 10% spray to the cervix reduces pain during intrauterine device insertion: a double-blind randomised controlled trial.
        J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care. 2016; 42: 83
        • Allen R.H.
        • Raker C.
        • Goyal V.
        Higher dose cervical 2% lidocaine gel for IUD insertion: a randomized controlled trial.
        Contraception. 2013; 88: 730
        • Ibrahim Z.M.
        • Sayed Ahmed W.A.
        Sublingual misoprostol prior to insertion of a T380A intrauterine device in women with no previous vaginal delivery.
        Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2013; 18: 300
        • Mody S.K.
        • Kiley J.
        • Rademaker A.
        • et al.
        Pain control for intrauterine device insertion: a randomized trial of 1% lidocaine paracervical block.
        Contraception. 2012; 86: 704
        • Monahan J.C.
        Using an age-specific nursing model to tailor care to the adolescent surgical patient.
        AORN J. 2014; 99: 733