Kimmy Rosielle

140 Chapter 6 Table 2. HSG procedure characteristics and outcomes. Characteristic Intervention (n=69) Control (n=65) HSG Completed (%) 68 (98.6) 62 (95.4) Instrumentation (%) Cervical vacuum cup 42 (60.0) 41 (63.1) Hysterophore 5 (7.2) 4 (6.1) Ballooncatheter 18 (26.0) 18 (27.7) Multiple 4 (5.8) 2 (3.1) Tenaculum (%) 11 (15.9) 9 (13.8) Bilateral tubal patency (%) 48 (69.6) 53 (82.8) Type of contrast (%) Oil-based 66 (95.7) 61 (93.8) Water-based 3 (4.3) 4 (6.2) Amount of contrast (ml) (mean, SD) # 9.4 (3.44) 8.6 (3.43) Pain medication used (%) 65 (94.2) 62 (95.4) Type of pain mediation used (%) ^ Paracetamol/panadol 18 (36.5) 12 (18.5) NSAID 54 (78.3) 56 (86.2) Opioids 0 0 Other 0 1 (1.5) Mean Anxiety score (APAIS) (mean, SD) * 9.2 (2.29) 10.1 (2.38) #reported for n=65 in the intervention group and n=61 in the control group. ^Some patients used multiple types of pain medication. * measured on a scale of 3 – 15. Primary outcome The overall mean pain score was 5.0 (SD 2.10) in the VR during HSG group, compared to 4.9 (SD 2.13) in the control group (p=0.915). Women reported a mean peak pain score of 6.8 (SD 2.25) using VR during HSG, compared to a peak pain score of 6.6 (SD 2.40) in the control group (p=0.574). The mean proportion of time women thought about being in pain during HSG, measured on the 5-point Likert scale (scale 1-5), was not significantly different between the intervention and control group (3.3 (SD 0.99) versus 3.5 (SD 1.10), p=0.159) (Table 3).

RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw