Skip to main content
. 2020 Jun 12;2020(6):CD002126. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD002126.pub4

Kilic 2009.

Study characteristics
Methods Single centre, parallel group RCT
No. of women randomised: 40
No. of women analysed: 40
Power calculation for sample size: 9 per group for 80% power to detect a 20% decrease in the PBAC score with SD 14
ITT analysis
Funding: not stated
Participants Country: Turkey
Women taking anticoagulant therapy after cardiac valve replacement, with median age 36 years.
Inclusion criteria
  • Women with a complaint of HMB and PBAC score > 185


Exclusion criteria: not reported
Interventions
  1. LNG‐IUS inserted during the first 3 days of menstrual bleeding ‒ antibiotic prophylaxis used

  2. Control ‒ observation

Outcomes Primary
  • Menstrual blood loss (measured by PBAC)


Secondary
  • Hb, haematocrit and ferritin levels

Notes HMB is a potential side effect of treatment with anticoagulant therapy
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias) Unclear risk Quote: "simple randomisation method" but this method was not described
Allocation concealment (selection bias) Unclear risk Quote: "closed envelopes" ‒ insufficient information to know whether allocation was properly concealed
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes High risk No blinding, lack of blinding likely to influence outcome
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) Haematin alkaline, Haemoglobin
All outcomes Low risk No blinding, lack of blinding unlikely to influence outcome
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes High risk No blinding, lack of blinding likely to influence outcome
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) (Haematine alkaline and haemoglobin)
All outcomes Low risk No blinding, lack of blinding unlikely to influence outcome
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes Low risk Quote: "all participants completed the study"
Selective reporting (reporting bias) Unclear risk Adverse events not assessed
Other bias Low risk Groups appeared comparable at baseline ‒ no other potential bias