Avaliação da dor na histeroscopia diagnóstica por vaginoscopia utilizando-se, como meio de distensão, solução salina à temperatura corporal: Ensaio clínico randomizado

Abstract

Avaliação da dor na histeroscopia diagnóstica por vaginoscopia utilizando-se, como meio de distensão, solução salina à temperatura corporal. Ensaio clínico randomizado AbstractPuRPOse: to compare diagnostic hysteroscopy through vaginoscopy, using warm saline solution, with traditional technique, regarding to pain, patient satisfaction and feasibility of the procedure. MethOds: randomized clinical trial, involving 184 women, referred for diagnostic hysteroscopy, between May and December of 2006. Participants were randomized to be submitted to hysteroscopy by the proposed technique, which consisted of access through vaginoscopy using normal saline at 36 o C as distension medium, no speculum or cervical grasping, or by the traditional technique with CO 2 . In both techniques, a 2.7 mm hysteroscope was used. Pain was assessed by the analogical visual scale, during the procedure and every five minutes after it. Results: the mean pain score was 1.60 in the proposed technique and 3.39 in the traditional technique (p<0.01). Lower pain scores were also observed after 5, 10 and 15 minutes (p<0,01) as well as after 20 minutes (p=0.056). In the proposed technique, 82.4% of the procedures were feasible, while, in the traditional technique, 84.9% were so (p=0.64). Satisfaction with the procedure was referred by 88.7% of women submitted to the proposed technique and by 76.3% of women submitted to the traditional technique (p<0.05). COnClusiOns: diagnostic hysteroscopy by the proposed technique resulted in less pain, same feasibility and greater satisfaction of patients.trabalho realizado na disciplina de tocoginecologia da Faculdade de Ciências Médicas da universidade de Pernambuco -FCM/uPe -Recife (Pe), brasil.

Effect of Warm Fluid Distension Media in relieving Pain in outpatient Hysteroscopy: Randomized Controlled Trial

“…Inserting a hard device (hysteroscope) can be uncomfortable especially in cases of underlying uterine diseases such as cervical inflammation or uterine fibroids. Additionally, the study found that the clarity of view and ease of entry were statistically equivalent in both study groups, which is a parameter that neither Evangelista et al 9 nor Almeida et al 15 had previously mentioned.…”

“…Lower pain scores were also observed after 5, 10, and 15 minutes (p<0.001) and after 20 minutes (p=0.056). However, the study's major limitation was that the two groups used different methods, making it difficult to compare the results 15 .…”

Comparative study of pain perception in outpatient hysteroscopy analyzing previous orientation by multimedia

“…Moreover, diagnostic hysteroscopy has been more effective in the identification of abnormalities from the endometrial cavity. 2, [5][6][7] The main indications for this procedure are abnormal uterine bleeding, infertility, repeated abortions, diagnosis and follow-up of endometrial hyperplasia, endometrial cancer staging, identification of foreign bodies, investigation of suspected intrauterine pathologies in other examinations and pre and postoperative control of hysteroscopic surgeries. 1,4,7,8 The risks of the hysteroscopy realization are extremely rare and consist of bleeding after the examination, intrauterine infection and uterine perforation.…”

Qualidade de vida de mulheres com pólipo endometrial submetidas a histeroscopia

“…Ressalta-se o estudo realizado no Brasil, em 2008, com média de dor de 6,0 (De Carvalho Schettini et al, 2007) e outros dois mais recentes com população indiana com média de 4,1 a 5,9 (Morgan et al, 2004;Sharma et al, 2009;Singh et al, 2009). A maioria dos trabalhos são europeus e descrevem média de dor leve variando de 1,6 a 44 (Lau et al, 1999;De Angelis et al, 2003a, Campo et al, 2005Guida et al, 2006;Sagiv et al, 2006;Almeida et al, 2008). Alguns descrevem ausência de dor em 78 a 90% das pacientes (Bettocchi et al, 2004;Cicinelli et al, 2007) ou média de dor de 0,5 em uma escala de 0 a 10 (Garbin et al, 2006).…”