Summary of findings 3. Summary of findings: tubal ring versus electrocoagulation.
| Tubal ring compared with electrocoagulation for interval sterilisation | ||||||
|
Patient or population: women > 6 weeks postpartum requesting tubal sterilisation Settings: any Intervention: tubal ring Comparison: electrocoagulation | ||||||
| Outcomes | Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI) | Relative effect (95% CI) | No of participants (studies) | Quality of the evidence (GRADE) | Comments | |
| Assumed risk | Corresponding risk | |||||
| Electrocoagulation | Ring | |||||
| Major morbidity: total | Low risk population |
OR 0.14 0.00 to 7.01 |
596 (2) | ⊕⊕⊝⊝ low1,2 |
Unipolar electrocoagulation stated in one study and not specified in the other. Only one event reported in total | |
| 0.5 per 1000 |
0 per 1000 (0 to 4) |
|||||
| Minor morbidity: total | Low risk population |
OR 0.97 (0.50, 1.87) |
596 (2) | ⊕⊕⊕⊝ moderate1 | ||
| 66 per 1000 | 64 per 1000 (33 to 123) | |||||
| Technical failures: total | Low risk population |
OR 3.42 (0.59 to 19.81) |
596 (2) | ⊕⊕⊕⊝ moderate1 | ||
| 3 per 1000 | 10 per 1000 (2 to 60) | |||||
| Failure rate: total | not estimable | not estimable | Not estimable due to insufficient data | 160 (1) | ‐ | No pregnancies reported in one study |
|
Complaints ‐ postoperative pain (24 hours) |
Low risk population |
OR 3.40 (1.17 to 9.84) |
596 (2) | ⊕⊕⊝⊝ low1,3 |
||
| 176 per 1000 | 598 per 1000 (206 to 1000) | |||||
| Complaints ‐ persistent pain at follow‐up visit | Low risk population |
OR 1.22 (0.75 to 1.97) |
594 (2) | ⊕⊕⊕⊝ moderate1 | ||
| 140 per 1000 | 171 per 1000 (105 to 276) | |||||
| *The basis for the assumed risk is the median control group (electrocoagulation) risk across studies. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: confidence interval; OR: odds ratio | ||||||
| GRADE Working Group grades of evidence High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect. Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate. Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate. Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate. | ||||||
1 Downgraded due to imprecision.
2 Downgraded due to sparse data.
3 Downgraded due to inconsistency.