Preference for uterine tamponade devices as a barrier to research: a provider survey

OBJECTIVE: A recent review in the American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology MFM1 Phillips JM Eppes C Rodriguez M Sakamoto S Traditional uterine tamponade and vacuum-induced uterine tamponade devices in obstetrical hemorrhage management. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2023; 5100739 Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (2) Google Scholar reported reassuring safety and preliminary efficacy data for novel uterine suction tamponade devices, including “suction tube uterine tamponade,” 2 Hofmeyr GJ Singata-Madliki M Novel suction tube uterine tamponade for treating intractable postpartum haemorrhage: description of technique and report of three cases. BJOG. 2020; 127: 1280-1283 Crossref PubMed Scopus (6) Google Scholar and emphasized that “well-designed” studies are essential. We conducted a randomized trial at 10 sites in South Africa comparing improvised low-cost suction tube uterine tamponade with balloon tamponade standard of care. 3 Cebekhulu SN Abdul H Batting J et al. “Suction tube uterine tamponade” for treatment of refractory postpartum hemorrhage: internal feasibility and acceptability pilot of a randomized clinical trial. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2022; 158: 79-85 Crossref PubMed Scopus (2) Google Scholar After steady recruitment over the first year, recruitment became very slow. Anecdotal reports from the sites suggested that providers at the participating hospitals had developed a preference for using suction tube uterine tamponade rather than randomizing participants. The current study objectively determined provider preferences for uterine tamponade devices.