Skip to main content
. 2009 Oct 7;2009(4):CD002120. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD002120.pub3

Hendrix 2002.

Methods Randomisation list was generated by computer. 
 Double blind 
 77 participants randomised, 59 analysed.
Participants Inclusion: history of Grade 2 or Grade 3 dysmenorrhoea for at least 4 cycles, regular menstrual cycles, pelvic exam to confirm no pathology, no older than 32 years old. 
 Exclusion: secondary dysmenorrhoea, suspected pregnancy, drugs use, sexually transmitted disease. 
 Age: mean 24.2 +/‐ 4.9 
 Location: USA
Interventions 1. 21 days of desogestrel 0.15mg, ethinyl estradiol 0.02mg followed by 2 days of placebo and 5 days of ethinyl estradiol 0.01mg 
 2. Placebo 
 Duration: 4 cycles
Outcomes Pain severity (5 point scale)
Notes  
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Adequate sequence generation? Low risk Computer generated list
Allocation concealment? Low risk A ‐ Adequate
Blinding? 
 All outcomes Low risk Double
Incomplete outcome data addressed? 
 All outcomes Low risk  
Free of selective reporting? Unclear risk No adverse events
Power calculations High risk  
Dropouts reported Low risk 25/77 (14 from the desogestrel group and 11 from the placebo group)
Baseline comparability Low risk