User login
For MD-IQ use only
Marital stress tied to worse outcome in young MI patients
Severe marital stress was associated with worse recovery after myocardial infarction in a large U.S. cohort of married/partnered patients aged 55 years or younger.
Compared with patients who reported no or mild marital stress a month after their MI, patients who reported severe marital stress had worse physical and mental health, worse generic and cardiovascular quality of life, more frequent angina symptoms, and a greater likelihood of having a hospital readmission a year later.
These findings held true after adjusting for gender, age, race/ethnicity, and baseline health status (model 1) and after further adjusting for education and income levels and employment and insurance status (model 2).
A greater percentage of women than men reported having severe marital stress (39% vs. 30%; P = .001).
Cenjing Zhu, MPhil, a PhD candidate at Yale University, New Haven, Conn., and colleagues will present this study at the American Heart Association scientific sessions.
The results show that “both patients and care providers should be aware that stress experienced in one’s everyday life, such as marital stress, can affect AMI [acute MI] recovery,” Ms. Zhu said in an email.
Health care providers should consider incorporating screening for everyday stress during follow-up patient visits to better spot people at high risk of a poor recovery and further hospitalizations, she added. When possible, they could guide patients to resources to help them manage and reduce their stress levels.
According to Ms. Zhu, the findings suggest that “managing personal stress may be as important as managing other clinical risk factors during the recovery process.”
This study in younger patients with MI “shows that high levels of marital stress impair heart attack recovery, and women have greater impairment in their heart attack recovery compared to men,” AHA spokesperson Nieca Goldberg, MD, who was not involved with this research, told this news organization.
The study shows that “clinicians have to incorporate mental health as part of their assessment of all patients,” said Dr. Goldberg, a clinical associate professor of medicine at New York University and medical director of Atria New York City.
“Our mental health impacts our physical health,” she noted. “Questions about marital stress should be included as part of an overall assessment of mental health. This means assessing all patients for stress, anxiety, and depression.”
Patients who are experiencing marital stress should share the information with their doctor and discuss ways to be referred to therapists and cardiac rehabilitation providers, she said. “My final thought is, women have often been told that their cardiac symptoms are due to stress by doctors. Now we know stress impacts physical health and [is] no longer an excuse but a contributing factor to our physical health.”
Does marital stress affect young MI recovery?
Previous literature has linked psychological stress with worse cardiovascular outcomes, Ms. Zhu noted.
However, little is known about the prognostic impact of marital stress on 1-year health outcomes for younger people who survive an MI.
To investigate this, the researchers analyzed data from participants in the Variation in Recovery: Role of Gender on Outcomes of Young AMI Patients (VIRGO) study.
The current study comprised 1,593 adults, including 1,020 female participants (64%), who were treated for MI at 103 hospitals in 30 U.S. states.
VIRGO enrolled participants in a 2:1 female-to-male ratio so as to enrich the inclusion of women, Ms. Zhu explained.
In the study, “partnered” participants were individuals who self-reported as “living as married/living with a partner.” There were 126 such patients (8%) in the current study.
The mean age of the patients was 47, and about 90% were 40-55 years old. Three quarters were White, 13% were Black, and 7% were Hispanic.
Marital stress was assessed on the basis of patients’ replies to 17 questions in the Stockholm Marital Stress Scale regarding the quality of their emotional and sexual relationships with their spouses/partners.
The researchers divided patients into three groups on the basis of their marital stress: mild or absent (lowest quartile), moderate (second quartile), and severe (upper two quartiles).
At 1 year after their MI, patients replied to questionnaires that assessed their health, quality of life, and depressive and angina symptoms. Hospital readmissions were determined on the basis of self-reports and medical records.
Compared to participants who reported no or mild marital stress, those who reported severe mental stress had significantly worse scores for physical and mental health and generic and cardiovascular quality of life, after adjusting for baseline health and demographics. They had worse scores for mental health and quality of life, after further adjusting for socioeconomic status.
In the fully adjusted model, patients who reported severe marital stress were significantly more likely to report more frequent chest pain/angina (odds ratio, 1.49; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-2.10; P = .023) and to have been readmitted to hospital for any cause (OR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.04-2.00; P = .006), compared with the patients who reported no or mild marital stress.
Study limitations include the fact that the findings are based on self-reported questionnaire replies; they may not be generalizable to patients in other countries; and they do not extend beyond a period of 1 year.
The researchers call for further research “to understand this complex relationship and potential causal pathway associated with these findings.”
“Additional stressors beyond marital stress, such as financial strain or work stress, may also play a role in young adults’ recovery, and the interaction between these factors require further research,” Ms. Zhu noted in a press release from the AHA.
The study was funded by Canadian Institutes of Health Research. The VIRGO study was funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Ms. Zhu and Dr. Goldberg have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Severe marital stress was associated with worse recovery after myocardial infarction in a large U.S. cohort of married/partnered patients aged 55 years or younger.
Compared with patients who reported no or mild marital stress a month after their MI, patients who reported severe marital stress had worse physical and mental health, worse generic and cardiovascular quality of life, more frequent angina symptoms, and a greater likelihood of having a hospital readmission a year later.
These findings held true after adjusting for gender, age, race/ethnicity, and baseline health status (model 1) and after further adjusting for education and income levels and employment and insurance status (model 2).
A greater percentage of women than men reported having severe marital stress (39% vs. 30%; P = .001).
Cenjing Zhu, MPhil, a PhD candidate at Yale University, New Haven, Conn., and colleagues will present this study at the American Heart Association scientific sessions.
The results show that “both patients and care providers should be aware that stress experienced in one’s everyday life, such as marital stress, can affect AMI [acute MI] recovery,” Ms. Zhu said in an email.
Health care providers should consider incorporating screening for everyday stress during follow-up patient visits to better spot people at high risk of a poor recovery and further hospitalizations, she added. When possible, they could guide patients to resources to help them manage and reduce their stress levels.
According to Ms. Zhu, the findings suggest that “managing personal stress may be as important as managing other clinical risk factors during the recovery process.”
This study in younger patients with MI “shows that high levels of marital stress impair heart attack recovery, and women have greater impairment in their heart attack recovery compared to men,” AHA spokesperson Nieca Goldberg, MD, who was not involved with this research, told this news organization.
The study shows that “clinicians have to incorporate mental health as part of their assessment of all patients,” said Dr. Goldberg, a clinical associate professor of medicine at New York University and medical director of Atria New York City.
“Our mental health impacts our physical health,” she noted. “Questions about marital stress should be included as part of an overall assessment of mental health. This means assessing all patients for stress, anxiety, and depression.”
Patients who are experiencing marital stress should share the information with their doctor and discuss ways to be referred to therapists and cardiac rehabilitation providers, she said. “My final thought is, women have often been told that their cardiac symptoms are due to stress by doctors. Now we know stress impacts physical health and [is] no longer an excuse but a contributing factor to our physical health.”
Does marital stress affect young MI recovery?
Previous literature has linked psychological stress with worse cardiovascular outcomes, Ms. Zhu noted.
However, little is known about the prognostic impact of marital stress on 1-year health outcomes for younger people who survive an MI.
To investigate this, the researchers analyzed data from participants in the Variation in Recovery: Role of Gender on Outcomes of Young AMI Patients (VIRGO) study.
The current study comprised 1,593 adults, including 1,020 female participants (64%), who were treated for MI at 103 hospitals in 30 U.S. states.
VIRGO enrolled participants in a 2:1 female-to-male ratio so as to enrich the inclusion of women, Ms. Zhu explained.
In the study, “partnered” participants were individuals who self-reported as “living as married/living with a partner.” There were 126 such patients (8%) in the current study.
The mean age of the patients was 47, and about 90% were 40-55 years old. Three quarters were White, 13% were Black, and 7% were Hispanic.
Marital stress was assessed on the basis of patients’ replies to 17 questions in the Stockholm Marital Stress Scale regarding the quality of their emotional and sexual relationships with their spouses/partners.
The researchers divided patients into three groups on the basis of their marital stress: mild or absent (lowest quartile), moderate (second quartile), and severe (upper two quartiles).
At 1 year after their MI, patients replied to questionnaires that assessed their health, quality of life, and depressive and angina symptoms. Hospital readmissions were determined on the basis of self-reports and medical records.
Compared to participants who reported no or mild marital stress, those who reported severe mental stress had significantly worse scores for physical and mental health and generic and cardiovascular quality of life, after adjusting for baseline health and demographics. They had worse scores for mental health and quality of life, after further adjusting for socioeconomic status.
In the fully adjusted model, patients who reported severe marital stress were significantly more likely to report more frequent chest pain/angina (odds ratio, 1.49; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-2.10; P = .023) and to have been readmitted to hospital for any cause (OR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.04-2.00; P = .006), compared with the patients who reported no or mild marital stress.
Study limitations include the fact that the findings are based on self-reported questionnaire replies; they may not be generalizable to patients in other countries; and they do not extend beyond a period of 1 year.
The researchers call for further research “to understand this complex relationship and potential causal pathway associated with these findings.”
“Additional stressors beyond marital stress, such as financial strain or work stress, may also play a role in young adults’ recovery, and the interaction between these factors require further research,” Ms. Zhu noted in a press release from the AHA.
The study was funded by Canadian Institutes of Health Research. The VIRGO study was funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Ms. Zhu and Dr. Goldberg have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Severe marital stress was associated with worse recovery after myocardial infarction in a large U.S. cohort of married/partnered patients aged 55 years or younger.
Compared with patients who reported no or mild marital stress a month after their MI, patients who reported severe marital stress had worse physical and mental health, worse generic and cardiovascular quality of life, more frequent angina symptoms, and a greater likelihood of having a hospital readmission a year later.
These findings held true after adjusting for gender, age, race/ethnicity, and baseline health status (model 1) and after further adjusting for education and income levels and employment and insurance status (model 2).
A greater percentage of women than men reported having severe marital stress (39% vs. 30%; P = .001).
Cenjing Zhu, MPhil, a PhD candidate at Yale University, New Haven, Conn., and colleagues will present this study at the American Heart Association scientific sessions.
The results show that “both patients and care providers should be aware that stress experienced in one’s everyday life, such as marital stress, can affect AMI [acute MI] recovery,” Ms. Zhu said in an email.
Health care providers should consider incorporating screening for everyday stress during follow-up patient visits to better spot people at high risk of a poor recovery and further hospitalizations, she added. When possible, they could guide patients to resources to help them manage and reduce their stress levels.
According to Ms. Zhu, the findings suggest that “managing personal stress may be as important as managing other clinical risk factors during the recovery process.”
This study in younger patients with MI “shows that high levels of marital stress impair heart attack recovery, and women have greater impairment in their heart attack recovery compared to men,” AHA spokesperson Nieca Goldberg, MD, who was not involved with this research, told this news organization.
The study shows that “clinicians have to incorporate mental health as part of their assessment of all patients,” said Dr. Goldberg, a clinical associate professor of medicine at New York University and medical director of Atria New York City.
“Our mental health impacts our physical health,” she noted. “Questions about marital stress should be included as part of an overall assessment of mental health. This means assessing all patients for stress, anxiety, and depression.”
Patients who are experiencing marital stress should share the information with their doctor and discuss ways to be referred to therapists and cardiac rehabilitation providers, she said. “My final thought is, women have often been told that their cardiac symptoms are due to stress by doctors. Now we know stress impacts physical health and [is] no longer an excuse but a contributing factor to our physical health.”
Does marital stress affect young MI recovery?
Previous literature has linked psychological stress with worse cardiovascular outcomes, Ms. Zhu noted.
However, little is known about the prognostic impact of marital stress on 1-year health outcomes for younger people who survive an MI.
To investigate this, the researchers analyzed data from participants in the Variation in Recovery: Role of Gender on Outcomes of Young AMI Patients (VIRGO) study.
The current study comprised 1,593 adults, including 1,020 female participants (64%), who were treated for MI at 103 hospitals in 30 U.S. states.
VIRGO enrolled participants in a 2:1 female-to-male ratio so as to enrich the inclusion of women, Ms. Zhu explained.
In the study, “partnered” participants were individuals who self-reported as “living as married/living with a partner.” There were 126 such patients (8%) in the current study.
The mean age of the patients was 47, and about 90% were 40-55 years old. Three quarters were White, 13% were Black, and 7% were Hispanic.
Marital stress was assessed on the basis of patients’ replies to 17 questions in the Stockholm Marital Stress Scale regarding the quality of their emotional and sexual relationships with their spouses/partners.
The researchers divided patients into three groups on the basis of their marital stress: mild or absent (lowest quartile), moderate (second quartile), and severe (upper two quartiles).
At 1 year after their MI, patients replied to questionnaires that assessed their health, quality of life, and depressive and angina symptoms. Hospital readmissions were determined on the basis of self-reports and medical records.
Compared to participants who reported no or mild marital stress, those who reported severe mental stress had significantly worse scores for physical and mental health and generic and cardiovascular quality of life, after adjusting for baseline health and demographics. They had worse scores for mental health and quality of life, after further adjusting for socioeconomic status.
In the fully adjusted model, patients who reported severe marital stress were significantly more likely to report more frequent chest pain/angina (odds ratio, 1.49; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-2.10; P = .023) and to have been readmitted to hospital for any cause (OR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.04-2.00; P = .006), compared with the patients who reported no or mild marital stress.
Study limitations include the fact that the findings are based on self-reported questionnaire replies; they may not be generalizable to patients in other countries; and they do not extend beyond a period of 1 year.
The researchers call for further research “to understand this complex relationship and potential causal pathway associated with these findings.”
“Additional stressors beyond marital stress, such as financial strain or work stress, may also play a role in young adults’ recovery, and the interaction between these factors require further research,” Ms. Zhu noted in a press release from the AHA.
The study was funded by Canadian Institutes of Health Research. The VIRGO study was funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Ms. Zhu and Dr. Goldberg have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
FROM AHA 2022
The truth of alcohol consequences
Bad drinking consequence No. 87: Joining the LOTME team
Alcohol and college students go together like peanut butter and jelly. Or peanut butter and chocolate. Or peanut butter and toothpaste. Peanut butter goes with a lot of things.
Naturally, when you combine alcohol and college students, bad decisions are sure to follow. But have you ever wondered just how many bad decisions alcohol causes? A team of researchers from Penn State University, the undisputed champion of poor drinking decisions (trust us, we know), sure has. They’ve even conducted a 4-year study of 1,700 students as they carved a drunken swath through the many fine local drinking establishments, such as East Halls or that one frat house that hosts medieval battle–style ping pong tournaments.
The students were surveyed twice a year throughout the study, and the researchers compiled a list of all the various consequences their subjects experienced. Ultimately, college students will experience an average of 102 consequences from drinking during their 4-year college careers, which is an impressive number. Try thinking up a hundred consequences for anything.
Some consequences are less common than others – we imagine “missing the Renaissance Faire because you felt drunker the morning after than while you were drinking” is pretty low on the list – but more than 96% of students reported that they’d experienced a hangover and that drinking had caused them to say or do embarrassing things. Also, more than 70% said they needed additional alcohol to feel any effect, a potential sign of alcohol use disorder.
Once they had their list, the researchers focused on 12 of the more common and severe consequences, such as blacking out, hangovers, and missing work/class, and asked the study participants how their parents would react to their drinking and those specific consequences. Students who believed their parents would disapprove of alcohol-related consequences actually experienced fewer consequences overall.
College students, it seems, really do care what their parents think, even if they don’t express it, the researchers said. That gives space for parents to offer advice about the consequences of hard drinking, making decisions while drunk, or bringing godawful Fireball whiskey to parties. Seriously, don’t do that. Stuff’s bad, and you should feel bad for bringing it. Your parents raised you better than that.
COVID ‘expert’ discusses data sharing
We interrupt our regularly scheduled programming to bring you this special news event. Elon Musk, the world’s second-most annoying human, is holding a press conference to discuss, of all things, COVID-19.
Reporter: Hey, Mr. Musketeer, what qualifies you to talk about a global pandemic?
EM: As the official king of the Twitterverse, I’m pretty much an expert on any topic.
Reporter: Okay then, Mr. Muskmelon, what can you tell us about the new study in Agricultural Economics, which looked at consumers’ knowledge of local COVID infection rates and their willingness to eat at restaurants?
EM: Well, I know that one of the investigators, Rigoberto Lopez, PhD, of the University of Connecticut, said “no news is bad news.” Restaurants located in cities where local regulations required COVID tracking recovered faster than those in areas that did not, according to data from 87 restaurants in 10 Chinese cities that were gathered between Dec. 1, 2019, and March 27, 2020. Having access to local infection rate data made customers more comfortable going out to eat, the investigators explained.
Second reporter: Interesting, Mr. Muskox, but how about this headline from CNN: “Workers flee China’s biggest iPhone factory over Covid outbreak”? Do you agree with analysts, who said that “the chaos at Zhengzhou could jeopardize Apple and Foxconn’s output in the coming weeks,” as CNN put it?
EM: I did see that a manager at Foxconn, which owns the factory and is known to its friends as Hon Hai Precision Industry, told a Chinese media outlet that “workers are panicking over the spread of the virus at the factory and lack of access to official information.” As we’ve already discussed, no news is bad news.
That’s all the time I have to chat with you today. I’m off to fire some more Twitter employees.
In case you hadn’t already guessed, Vlad Putin is officially more annoying than Elon Musk. We now return to this week’s typical LOTME shenanigans, already in progress.
The deadliest month
With climate change making the world hotter, leading to more heat stroke and organ failure, you would think the summer months would be the most deadly. In reality, though, it’s quite the opposite.
There are multiple factors that make January the most deadly month out of the year, as LiveScience discovered in a recent analysis.
Let’s go through them, shall we?
Respiratory viruses: Robert Glatter, MD, of Lenox Hill Hospital in New York, told LiveScence that winter is the time for illnesses like the flu, bacterial pneumonia, and RSV. Millions of people worldwide die from the flu, according to the CDC. And the World Health Organization reported lower respiratory infections as the fourth-leading cause of death worldwide before COVID came along.
Heart disease: Heart conditions are actually more fatal in the winter months, according to a study published in Circulation. The cold puts more stress on the heart to keep the body warm, which can be a challenge for people who already have preexisting heart conditions.
Space heaters: Dr. Glatter also told Live Science that the use of space heaters could be a factor in the cold winter months since they can lead to carbon monoxide poisoning and even fires. Silent killers.
Holiday season: A time for joy and merriment, certainly, but Christmas et al. have their downsides. By January we’re coming off a 3-month food and alcohol binge, which leads to cardiac stress. There’s also the psychological stress that comes with the season. Sometimes the most wonderful time of the year just isn’t.
So even though summer is hot, fall has hurricanes, and spring tends to have the highest suicide rate, winter still ends up being the deadliest season.
Bad drinking consequence No. 87: Joining the LOTME team
Alcohol and college students go together like peanut butter and jelly. Or peanut butter and chocolate. Or peanut butter and toothpaste. Peanut butter goes with a lot of things.
Naturally, when you combine alcohol and college students, bad decisions are sure to follow. But have you ever wondered just how many bad decisions alcohol causes? A team of researchers from Penn State University, the undisputed champion of poor drinking decisions (trust us, we know), sure has. They’ve even conducted a 4-year study of 1,700 students as they carved a drunken swath through the many fine local drinking establishments, such as East Halls or that one frat house that hosts medieval battle–style ping pong tournaments.
The students were surveyed twice a year throughout the study, and the researchers compiled a list of all the various consequences their subjects experienced. Ultimately, college students will experience an average of 102 consequences from drinking during their 4-year college careers, which is an impressive number. Try thinking up a hundred consequences for anything.
Some consequences are less common than others – we imagine “missing the Renaissance Faire because you felt drunker the morning after than while you were drinking” is pretty low on the list – but more than 96% of students reported that they’d experienced a hangover and that drinking had caused them to say or do embarrassing things. Also, more than 70% said they needed additional alcohol to feel any effect, a potential sign of alcohol use disorder.
Once they had their list, the researchers focused on 12 of the more common and severe consequences, such as blacking out, hangovers, and missing work/class, and asked the study participants how their parents would react to their drinking and those specific consequences. Students who believed their parents would disapprove of alcohol-related consequences actually experienced fewer consequences overall.
College students, it seems, really do care what their parents think, even if they don’t express it, the researchers said. That gives space for parents to offer advice about the consequences of hard drinking, making decisions while drunk, or bringing godawful Fireball whiskey to parties. Seriously, don’t do that. Stuff’s bad, and you should feel bad for bringing it. Your parents raised you better than that.
COVID ‘expert’ discusses data sharing
We interrupt our regularly scheduled programming to bring you this special news event. Elon Musk, the world’s second-most annoying human, is holding a press conference to discuss, of all things, COVID-19.
Reporter: Hey, Mr. Musketeer, what qualifies you to talk about a global pandemic?
EM: As the official king of the Twitterverse, I’m pretty much an expert on any topic.
Reporter: Okay then, Mr. Muskmelon, what can you tell us about the new study in Agricultural Economics, which looked at consumers’ knowledge of local COVID infection rates and their willingness to eat at restaurants?
EM: Well, I know that one of the investigators, Rigoberto Lopez, PhD, of the University of Connecticut, said “no news is bad news.” Restaurants located in cities where local regulations required COVID tracking recovered faster than those in areas that did not, according to data from 87 restaurants in 10 Chinese cities that were gathered between Dec. 1, 2019, and March 27, 2020. Having access to local infection rate data made customers more comfortable going out to eat, the investigators explained.
Second reporter: Interesting, Mr. Muskox, but how about this headline from CNN: “Workers flee China’s biggest iPhone factory over Covid outbreak”? Do you agree with analysts, who said that “the chaos at Zhengzhou could jeopardize Apple and Foxconn’s output in the coming weeks,” as CNN put it?
EM: I did see that a manager at Foxconn, which owns the factory and is known to its friends as Hon Hai Precision Industry, told a Chinese media outlet that “workers are panicking over the spread of the virus at the factory and lack of access to official information.” As we’ve already discussed, no news is bad news.
That’s all the time I have to chat with you today. I’m off to fire some more Twitter employees.
In case you hadn’t already guessed, Vlad Putin is officially more annoying than Elon Musk. We now return to this week’s typical LOTME shenanigans, already in progress.
The deadliest month
With climate change making the world hotter, leading to more heat stroke and organ failure, you would think the summer months would be the most deadly. In reality, though, it’s quite the opposite.
There are multiple factors that make January the most deadly month out of the year, as LiveScience discovered in a recent analysis.
Let’s go through them, shall we?
Respiratory viruses: Robert Glatter, MD, of Lenox Hill Hospital in New York, told LiveScence that winter is the time for illnesses like the flu, bacterial pneumonia, and RSV. Millions of people worldwide die from the flu, according to the CDC. And the World Health Organization reported lower respiratory infections as the fourth-leading cause of death worldwide before COVID came along.
Heart disease: Heart conditions are actually more fatal in the winter months, according to a study published in Circulation. The cold puts more stress on the heart to keep the body warm, which can be a challenge for people who already have preexisting heart conditions.
Space heaters: Dr. Glatter also told Live Science that the use of space heaters could be a factor in the cold winter months since they can lead to carbon monoxide poisoning and even fires. Silent killers.
Holiday season: A time for joy and merriment, certainly, but Christmas et al. have their downsides. By January we’re coming off a 3-month food and alcohol binge, which leads to cardiac stress. There’s also the psychological stress that comes with the season. Sometimes the most wonderful time of the year just isn’t.
So even though summer is hot, fall has hurricanes, and spring tends to have the highest suicide rate, winter still ends up being the deadliest season.
Bad drinking consequence No. 87: Joining the LOTME team
Alcohol and college students go together like peanut butter and jelly. Or peanut butter and chocolate. Or peanut butter and toothpaste. Peanut butter goes with a lot of things.
Naturally, when you combine alcohol and college students, bad decisions are sure to follow. But have you ever wondered just how many bad decisions alcohol causes? A team of researchers from Penn State University, the undisputed champion of poor drinking decisions (trust us, we know), sure has. They’ve even conducted a 4-year study of 1,700 students as they carved a drunken swath through the many fine local drinking establishments, such as East Halls or that one frat house that hosts medieval battle–style ping pong tournaments.
The students were surveyed twice a year throughout the study, and the researchers compiled a list of all the various consequences their subjects experienced. Ultimately, college students will experience an average of 102 consequences from drinking during their 4-year college careers, which is an impressive number. Try thinking up a hundred consequences for anything.
Some consequences are less common than others – we imagine “missing the Renaissance Faire because you felt drunker the morning after than while you were drinking” is pretty low on the list – but more than 96% of students reported that they’d experienced a hangover and that drinking had caused them to say or do embarrassing things. Also, more than 70% said they needed additional alcohol to feel any effect, a potential sign of alcohol use disorder.
Once they had their list, the researchers focused on 12 of the more common and severe consequences, such as blacking out, hangovers, and missing work/class, and asked the study participants how their parents would react to their drinking and those specific consequences. Students who believed their parents would disapprove of alcohol-related consequences actually experienced fewer consequences overall.
College students, it seems, really do care what their parents think, even if they don’t express it, the researchers said. That gives space for parents to offer advice about the consequences of hard drinking, making decisions while drunk, or bringing godawful Fireball whiskey to parties. Seriously, don’t do that. Stuff’s bad, and you should feel bad for bringing it. Your parents raised you better than that.
COVID ‘expert’ discusses data sharing
We interrupt our regularly scheduled programming to bring you this special news event. Elon Musk, the world’s second-most annoying human, is holding a press conference to discuss, of all things, COVID-19.
Reporter: Hey, Mr. Musketeer, what qualifies you to talk about a global pandemic?
EM: As the official king of the Twitterverse, I’m pretty much an expert on any topic.
Reporter: Okay then, Mr. Muskmelon, what can you tell us about the new study in Agricultural Economics, which looked at consumers’ knowledge of local COVID infection rates and their willingness to eat at restaurants?
EM: Well, I know that one of the investigators, Rigoberto Lopez, PhD, of the University of Connecticut, said “no news is bad news.” Restaurants located in cities where local regulations required COVID tracking recovered faster than those in areas that did not, according to data from 87 restaurants in 10 Chinese cities that were gathered between Dec. 1, 2019, and March 27, 2020. Having access to local infection rate data made customers more comfortable going out to eat, the investigators explained.
Second reporter: Interesting, Mr. Muskox, but how about this headline from CNN: “Workers flee China’s biggest iPhone factory over Covid outbreak”? Do you agree with analysts, who said that “the chaos at Zhengzhou could jeopardize Apple and Foxconn’s output in the coming weeks,” as CNN put it?
EM: I did see that a manager at Foxconn, which owns the factory and is known to its friends as Hon Hai Precision Industry, told a Chinese media outlet that “workers are panicking over the spread of the virus at the factory and lack of access to official information.” As we’ve already discussed, no news is bad news.
That’s all the time I have to chat with you today. I’m off to fire some more Twitter employees.
In case you hadn’t already guessed, Vlad Putin is officially more annoying than Elon Musk. We now return to this week’s typical LOTME shenanigans, already in progress.
The deadliest month
With climate change making the world hotter, leading to more heat stroke and organ failure, you would think the summer months would be the most deadly. In reality, though, it’s quite the opposite.
There are multiple factors that make January the most deadly month out of the year, as LiveScience discovered in a recent analysis.
Let’s go through them, shall we?
Respiratory viruses: Robert Glatter, MD, of Lenox Hill Hospital in New York, told LiveScence that winter is the time for illnesses like the flu, bacterial pneumonia, and RSV. Millions of people worldwide die from the flu, according to the CDC. And the World Health Organization reported lower respiratory infections as the fourth-leading cause of death worldwide before COVID came along.
Heart disease: Heart conditions are actually more fatal in the winter months, according to a study published in Circulation. The cold puts more stress on the heart to keep the body warm, which can be a challenge for people who already have preexisting heart conditions.
Space heaters: Dr. Glatter also told Live Science that the use of space heaters could be a factor in the cold winter months since they can lead to carbon monoxide poisoning and even fires. Silent killers.
Holiday season: A time for joy and merriment, certainly, but Christmas et al. have their downsides. By January we’re coming off a 3-month food and alcohol binge, which leads to cardiac stress. There’s also the psychological stress that comes with the season. Sometimes the most wonderful time of the year just isn’t.
So even though summer is hot, fall has hurricanes, and spring tends to have the highest suicide rate, winter still ends up being the deadliest season.
European research team to study drug resistance in psychiatry
Having secured 11 million euros in funding from the European Union’s Horizon Health program, an international team of pharmacology, pharmacogenetics, and psychiatry experts has set to work in hopes of helping patients with severe mental illnesses.
On this team is a group of researchers from the University of Cagliari in Sardinia, Italy. They are part of a network of international experts from 26 universities, research centers, and European associations, all of whom have vast experience in the fields of psychiatry, pharmacology, genetics, and statistics. Coordinating the project is Bernhard T. Baune, MD, PhD, professor of psychiatry at the University of Münster, Germany.
The problem of drug resistance is of great relevance to psychiatrists. About one-third of patients do not respond to pharmacologic therapies; as a result, their illness becomes more and more severe. This development has a major impact on these patients’ quality of life. In addition, health care and social services face a rise in the costs associated with managing the illnesses.
The research team from the University of Cagliari has two members from the department of biomedical sciences – Alessio Squassina, PhD, head of the pharmacogenetics laboratory, and Claudia Pisanu, MD, PhD – and two translational clinical researchers from the department of medical sciences and public health – Bernardo Carpiniello, MD, head of the psychiatry division, and Mirko Manchia, MD, PhD. They will be in charge of recruiting and collecting biological material from one set of patients with mental illnesses, collecting DNA and performing genetic screenings for all of the patients recruited by the network’s members in the various European countries, and conducting and coordinating clinical trials in which the pharmacologic therapies will be guided based on the molecular results.
“The process of figuring out whether someone has drug resistance is complex,” explained Dr. Squassina. “It may require very long periods of treatment and observation which, in the end, severely impact the patient’s chances of seeing a significant improvement in their symptoms and of being able to reintegrate themselves into society in the shortest possible time frame.” The goal of the Psych-STRATA project is to come up with a predictive algorithm – consisting of molecular markers and clinical data – that, before a specific antidepressant is even given, will be able to identify the patients who have a greater probability of responding and those who have a greater probability of not responding. Psych-STRATA’s findings could have a meaningful positive effect on the lives of patients with mental illnesses, as they would provide psychiatrists with guidance for managing pharmacologic therapies more precisely and in a way that is based on patients’ biological characteristics. This, in turn, would increase the efficacy of drugs, lower the risks of adverse effects, and significantly contribute to achieving quick remission of symptoms.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com. This article was translated from Univadis Italy.
Having secured 11 million euros in funding from the European Union’s Horizon Health program, an international team of pharmacology, pharmacogenetics, and psychiatry experts has set to work in hopes of helping patients with severe mental illnesses.
On this team is a group of researchers from the University of Cagliari in Sardinia, Italy. They are part of a network of international experts from 26 universities, research centers, and European associations, all of whom have vast experience in the fields of psychiatry, pharmacology, genetics, and statistics. Coordinating the project is Bernhard T. Baune, MD, PhD, professor of psychiatry at the University of Münster, Germany.
The problem of drug resistance is of great relevance to psychiatrists. About one-third of patients do not respond to pharmacologic therapies; as a result, their illness becomes more and more severe. This development has a major impact on these patients’ quality of life. In addition, health care and social services face a rise in the costs associated with managing the illnesses.
The research team from the University of Cagliari has two members from the department of biomedical sciences – Alessio Squassina, PhD, head of the pharmacogenetics laboratory, and Claudia Pisanu, MD, PhD – and two translational clinical researchers from the department of medical sciences and public health – Bernardo Carpiniello, MD, head of the psychiatry division, and Mirko Manchia, MD, PhD. They will be in charge of recruiting and collecting biological material from one set of patients with mental illnesses, collecting DNA and performing genetic screenings for all of the patients recruited by the network’s members in the various European countries, and conducting and coordinating clinical trials in which the pharmacologic therapies will be guided based on the molecular results.
“The process of figuring out whether someone has drug resistance is complex,” explained Dr. Squassina. “It may require very long periods of treatment and observation which, in the end, severely impact the patient’s chances of seeing a significant improvement in their symptoms and of being able to reintegrate themselves into society in the shortest possible time frame.” The goal of the Psych-STRATA project is to come up with a predictive algorithm – consisting of molecular markers and clinical data – that, before a specific antidepressant is even given, will be able to identify the patients who have a greater probability of responding and those who have a greater probability of not responding. Psych-STRATA’s findings could have a meaningful positive effect on the lives of patients with mental illnesses, as they would provide psychiatrists with guidance for managing pharmacologic therapies more precisely and in a way that is based on patients’ biological characteristics. This, in turn, would increase the efficacy of drugs, lower the risks of adverse effects, and significantly contribute to achieving quick remission of symptoms.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com. This article was translated from Univadis Italy.
Having secured 11 million euros in funding from the European Union’s Horizon Health program, an international team of pharmacology, pharmacogenetics, and psychiatry experts has set to work in hopes of helping patients with severe mental illnesses.
On this team is a group of researchers from the University of Cagliari in Sardinia, Italy. They are part of a network of international experts from 26 universities, research centers, and European associations, all of whom have vast experience in the fields of psychiatry, pharmacology, genetics, and statistics. Coordinating the project is Bernhard T. Baune, MD, PhD, professor of psychiatry at the University of Münster, Germany.
The problem of drug resistance is of great relevance to psychiatrists. About one-third of patients do not respond to pharmacologic therapies; as a result, their illness becomes more and more severe. This development has a major impact on these patients’ quality of life. In addition, health care and social services face a rise in the costs associated with managing the illnesses.
The research team from the University of Cagliari has two members from the department of biomedical sciences – Alessio Squassina, PhD, head of the pharmacogenetics laboratory, and Claudia Pisanu, MD, PhD – and two translational clinical researchers from the department of medical sciences and public health – Bernardo Carpiniello, MD, head of the psychiatry division, and Mirko Manchia, MD, PhD. They will be in charge of recruiting and collecting biological material from one set of patients with mental illnesses, collecting DNA and performing genetic screenings for all of the patients recruited by the network’s members in the various European countries, and conducting and coordinating clinical trials in which the pharmacologic therapies will be guided based on the molecular results.
“The process of figuring out whether someone has drug resistance is complex,” explained Dr. Squassina. “It may require very long periods of treatment and observation which, in the end, severely impact the patient’s chances of seeing a significant improvement in their symptoms and of being able to reintegrate themselves into society in the shortest possible time frame.” The goal of the Psych-STRATA project is to come up with a predictive algorithm – consisting of molecular markers and clinical data – that, before a specific antidepressant is even given, will be able to identify the patients who have a greater probability of responding and those who have a greater probability of not responding. Psych-STRATA’s findings could have a meaningful positive effect on the lives of patients with mental illnesses, as they would provide psychiatrists with guidance for managing pharmacologic therapies more precisely and in a way that is based on patients’ biological characteristics. This, in turn, would increase the efficacy of drugs, lower the risks of adverse effects, and significantly contribute to achieving quick remission of symptoms.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com. This article was translated from Univadis Italy.
Don’t wait for patients to bring up their GI symptoms
Nearly three-quarters of Americans would wait before discussing GI symptoms with a health care provider if their bowel frequency or symptoms changed, with more than a quarter overall waiting for symptoms to become severe, according to a new survey from the American Gastroenterological Association.
Nearly 40% of people said GI symptoms had disrupted everyday activities such as exercising, running errands, and spending time with family or friends, but despite these disruptions, 30% of people said they would only discuss their bowel-related concerns if their doctor brought it up first. In response, the AGA launched “Trust Your Gut,” an awareness campaign aimed at shortening the time from the onset of bowel symptoms to discussions with health care providers.
“So many patients are either fearful or embarrassed about discussing their digestive symptoms such that they delay care unless the health care provider brings it up,” said Rajeev Jain, MD, a gastroenterologist with Texas Digestive Disease Consultants, AGA patient education adviser and a Trust Your Gut spokesperson.
“This potential delay could be detrimental in some cases, such as bleeding related to colon cancer,” he said. “If diagnosed sooner, an operation or chemotherapy could lead to treatment and a cure in those cases, versus advanced cancer that may be incurable.”
The AGA Trust Your Gut survey, conducted by Kelton Global during May 9-11, 2022, included 1,010 respondents from a nationally representative sample of U.S. adults.
Struggling with the issue
About 28% of respondents said they would see a clinician immediately if their bowel frequency or symptoms changed. However, 72% said they would wait, and on top of that, 27% said they would wait until the condition became severe or didn’t resolve over time. Women were more likely than men to say they would wait, at 72% versus 64%.
Overall, 39% of respondents said bowel issues have stopped them from doing some type of activity in the past year. Men were more likely than women to say that bowel issues have affected their ability to do an activity, at 44% versus 35%.
“Typically, when it comes to functional or motility disorders or bowel dysfunction, we tend to see a higher prevalence in women, so this was somewhat surprising to see,” said Andrea Shin, MD, a gastroenterology specialist and assistant professor of medicine at Indiana University, Indianapolis, and AGA patient education adviser designate.
“Part of this difference may be related to the communication barrier and how sex or gender affects that relationship between a clinician and a patient,” she said.
The reasons for patients’ reluctance varies, but themes of uncertainty and embarrassment are prevalent. About 33% said they’re not sure whether the symptoms are a problem, 31% said they hope the symptoms improve on their own, 23% said it’s embarrassing, and 12% don’t know what to tell the doctor. Men were more likely than women to say they don’t know what to say to a doctor about their symptoms, at 15% versus 9%.
Starting the conversation
From a young age, many respondents were raised to avoid the topic of bowel issues. About 23% said their parents encouraged them not to mention bathroom-related health issues, and 10% said they didn’t talk about bowel issues at all. Another 32% said they could talk about it but had to use code words, such as “go to the bathroom” or “potty.”
“What this highlights is that patients are culturally taught not to talk about their digestive tract, or they’re embarrassed or uncertain,” Dr. Jain said. “At the end of the day, we need to destigmatize discussions about digestive function and normalize it as part of overall health.”
The survey respondents said they’d feel most comfortable talking about bowel issues with doctors (63%) and nurses (41%), as well as a significant other (44%), parent (32%), or friend (27%). Women were more likely than men to feel comfortable turning to a nurse practitioner or physician’s assistant (47% versus 35%) or a friend (30% versus 24%).
To feel more comfortable with these conversations, 42% of survey participants said they would like their doctor or clinician to describe what’s normal. About 30% want to know the appropriate terms to describe their situation.
Health care providers should also consider the cultural and social factors that may affect a patient’s disease experience, as well as how they interact with the health care system, Shin said.
“Understanding these differences might help us to better engage with a community that is diverse,” she said. “In general, we also need to be more proactive about drawing these conversations out of patients, who may not mention it unless we ask because they find it so personal.”
The AGA Trust Your Gut campaign is supported by a sponsorship from Janssen. Dr. Jain and Dr. Shin reported to relevant disclosures.
Help your patients learn more by encouraging them to visit https://patient.gastro.org/trust-your-gut/.
Nearly three-quarters of Americans would wait before discussing GI symptoms with a health care provider if their bowel frequency or symptoms changed, with more than a quarter overall waiting for symptoms to become severe, according to a new survey from the American Gastroenterological Association.
Nearly 40% of people said GI symptoms had disrupted everyday activities such as exercising, running errands, and spending time with family or friends, but despite these disruptions, 30% of people said they would only discuss their bowel-related concerns if their doctor brought it up first. In response, the AGA launched “Trust Your Gut,” an awareness campaign aimed at shortening the time from the onset of bowel symptoms to discussions with health care providers.
“So many patients are either fearful or embarrassed about discussing their digestive symptoms such that they delay care unless the health care provider brings it up,” said Rajeev Jain, MD, a gastroenterologist with Texas Digestive Disease Consultants, AGA patient education adviser and a Trust Your Gut spokesperson.
“This potential delay could be detrimental in some cases, such as bleeding related to colon cancer,” he said. “If diagnosed sooner, an operation or chemotherapy could lead to treatment and a cure in those cases, versus advanced cancer that may be incurable.”
The AGA Trust Your Gut survey, conducted by Kelton Global during May 9-11, 2022, included 1,010 respondents from a nationally representative sample of U.S. adults.
Struggling with the issue
About 28% of respondents said they would see a clinician immediately if their bowel frequency or symptoms changed. However, 72% said they would wait, and on top of that, 27% said they would wait until the condition became severe or didn’t resolve over time. Women were more likely than men to say they would wait, at 72% versus 64%.
Overall, 39% of respondents said bowel issues have stopped them from doing some type of activity in the past year. Men were more likely than women to say that bowel issues have affected their ability to do an activity, at 44% versus 35%.
“Typically, when it comes to functional or motility disorders or bowel dysfunction, we tend to see a higher prevalence in women, so this was somewhat surprising to see,” said Andrea Shin, MD, a gastroenterology specialist and assistant professor of medicine at Indiana University, Indianapolis, and AGA patient education adviser designate.
“Part of this difference may be related to the communication barrier and how sex or gender affects that relationship between a clinician and a patient,” she said.
The reasons for patients’ reluctance varies, but themes of uncertainty and embarrassment are prevalent. About 33% said they’re not sure whether the symptoms are a problem, 31% said they hope the symptoms improve on their own, 23% said it’s embarrassing, and 12% don’t know what to tell the doctor. Men were more likely than women to say they don’t know what to say to a doctor about their symptoms, at 15% versus 9%.
Starting the conversation
From a young age, many respondents were raised to avoid the topic of bowel issues. About 23% said their parents encouraged them not to mention bathroom-related health issues, and 10% said they didn’t talk about bowel issues at all. Another 32% said they could talk about it but had to use code words, such as “go to the bathroom” or “potty.”
“What this highlights is that patients are culturally taught not to talk about their digestive tract, or they’re embarrassed or uncertain,” Dr. Jain said. “At the end of the day, we need to destigmatize discussions about digestive function and normalize it as part of overall health.”
The survey respondents said they’d feel most comfortable talking about bowel issues with doctors (63%) and nurses (41%), as well as a significant other (44%), parent (32%), or friend (27%). Women were more likely than men to feel comfortable turning to a nurse practitioner or physician’s assistant (47% versus 35%) or a friend (30% versus 24%).
To feel more comfortable with these conversations, 42% of survey participants said they would like their doctor or clinician to describe what’s normal. About 30% want to know the appropriate terms to describe their situation.
Health care providers should also consider the cultural and social factors that may affect a patient’s disease experience, as well as how they interact with the health care system, Shin said.
“Understanding these differences might help us to better engage with a community that is diverse,” she said. “In general, we also need to be more proactive about drawing these conversations out of patients, who may not mention it unless we ask because they find it so personal.”
The AGA Trust Your Gut campaign is supported by a sponsorship from Janssen. Dr. Jain and Dr. Shin reported to relevant disclosures.
Help your patients learn more by encouraging them to visit https://patient.gastro.org/trust-your-gut/.
Nearly three-quarters of Americans would wait before discussing GI symptoms with a health care provider if their bowel frequency or symptoms changed, with more than a quarter overall waiting for symptoms to become severe, according to a new survey from the American Gastroenterological Association.
Nearly 40% of people said GI symptoms had disrupted everyday activities such as exercising, running errands, and spending time with family or friends, but despite these disruptions, 30% of people said they would only discuss their bowel-related concerns if their doctor brought it up first. In response, the AGA launched “Trust Your Gut,” an awareness campaign aimed at shortening the time from the onset of bowel symptoms to discussions with health care providers.
“So many patients are either fearful or embarrassed about discussing their digestive symptoms such that they delay care unless the health care provider brings it up,” said Rajeev Jain, MD, a gastroenterologist with Texas Digestive Disease Consultants, AGA patient education adviser and a Trust Your Gut spokesperson.
“This potential delay could be detrimental in some cases, such as bleeding related to colon cancer,” he said. “If diagnosed sooner, an operation or chemotherapy could lead to treatment and a cure in those cases, versus advanced cancer that may be incurable.”
The AGA Trust Your Gut survey, conducted by Kelton Global during May 9-11, 2022, included 1,010 respondents from a nationally representative sample of U.S. adults.
Struggling with the issue
About 28% of respondents said they would see a clinician immediately if their bowel frequency or symptoms changed. However, 72% said they would wait, and on top of that, 27% said they would wait until the condition became severe or didn’t resolve over time. Women were more likely than men to say they would wait, at 72% versus 64%.
Overall, 39% of respondents said bowel issues have stopped them from doing some type of activity in the past year. Men were more likely than women to say that bowel issues have affected their ability to do an activity, at 44% versus 35%.
“Typically, when it comes to functional or motility disorders or bowel dysfunction, we tend to see a higher prevalence in women, so this was somewhat surprising to see,” said Andrea Shin, MD, a gastroenterology specialist and assistant professor of medicine at Indiana University, Indianapolis, and AGA patient education adviser designate.
“Part of this difference may be related to the communication barrier and how sex or gender affects that relationship between a clinician and a patient,” she said.
The reasons for patients’ reluctance varies, but themes of uncertainty and embarrassment are prevalent. About 33% said they’re not sure whether the symptoms are a problem, 31% said they hope the symptoms improve on their own, 23% said it’s embarrassing, and 12% don’t know what to tell the doctor. Men were more likely than women to say they don’t know what to say to a doctor about their symptoms, at 15% versus 9%.
Starting the conversation
From a young age, many respondents were raised to avoid the topic of bowel issues. About 23% said their parents encouraged them not to mention bathroom-related health issues, and 10% said they didn’t talk about bowel issues at all. Another 32% said they could talk about it but had to use code words, such as “go to the bathroom” or “potty.”
“What this highlights is that patients are culturally taught not to talk about their digestive tract, or they’re embarrassed or uncertain,” Dr. Jain said. “At the end of the day, we need to destigmatize discussions about digestive function and normalize it as part of overall health.”
The survey respondents said they’d feel most comfortable talking about bowel issues with doctors (63%) and nurses (41%), as well as a significant other (44%), parent (32%), or friend (27%). Women were more likely than men to feel comfortable turning to a nurse practitioner or physician’s assistant (47% versus 35%) or a friend (30% versus 24%).
To feel more comfortable with these conversations, 42% of survey participants said they would like their doctor or clinician to describe what’s normal. About 30% want to know the appropriate terms to describe their situation.
Health care providers should also consider the cultural and social factors that may affect a patient’s disease experience, as well as how they interact with the health care system, Shin said.
“Understanding these differences might help us to better engage with a community that is diverse,” she said. “In general, we also need to be more proactive about drawing these conversations out of patients, who may not mention it unless we ask because they find it so personal.”
The AGA Trust Your Gut campaign is supported by a sponsorship from Janssen. Dr. Jain and Dr. Shin reported to relevant disclosures.
Help your patients learn more by encouraging them to visit https://patient.gastro.org/trust-your-gut/.
VA Fast-Tracks Hiring to Address Critical Shortages
In an intensive push to fill acute workforce shortages, the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is holding a “national onboarding surge event” the week of November 14. The goal is to get people who have already said yes to a job in the VA on that job more quickly. Every VA facility has been asked to submit a list of the highest-priority candidates, regardless of the position.
One of the most pressing reasons for getting more workers into the pipeline faster is that more and more veterans are entering VA care. As of October 1, tens of thousands of veterans will be eligible for VA health care, thanks to the Sergeant First Class Heath Robinson Honoring our Promise to Address Comprehensive Toxics Act of 2022 (PACT Act), passed in August, which expanded benefits for post-9/11 service members with illnesses due to toxic exposures.
Another reason is the need to fill the gaps left by attrition. In an October 19 press briefing, VA Undersecretary for Health Shereef Elnahal said the agency needs to hire about 52,000 employees per year just to keep up with the rate of health care professionals (HCPs) leaving the agency. At a September breakfast meeting with the Defense Writers Group, VA Secretary Denis McDonough said July 2022 marked the first month this year that the VA hired more nurses than it lost to retirement. He said the VA needs to hire 45,000 nurses over the next 3 years to keep up with attrition and growing demand for veteran care.
“We have to do a better job on hiring,” McDonough said. Streamlining the process is a major goal. Hiring rules loosened during the pandemic have since tightened back up. He pointed out that in many cases, the VA takes 90 to 100 days to onboard candidates and called the long-drawn-out process “being dragged through a bureaucratic morass.” During that time, he said, “They’re not being paid, they’re filling out paperwork… That’s disastrous.” In his press briefing, Elnahal said “we lose folks after we’ve made the selection” because the process is so long.
Moreover, the agency has a critical shortage not only of HCPs but the human resources professionals needed to fast-track the hirees’ progress. McDonough called it a “supply chain issue.” “We have the lowest ratio of human resource professionals per employee in the federal government by a long shot.” Partly, he said, because “a lot of our people end up hired away to other federal agencies.”
McDonough said the VA is also interested in transitioning more active-duty service members with in-demand skills, certifications, and talent into the VA workforce. “Cross-walking active duty into VA service much more aggressively,” he said, is another way to “grow that supply of ready, deployable, trained personnel.” The PACT Act gives the VA new incentives to entice workers, such as expanded recruitment, retention bonuses, and student loan repayment. The VA already provides training to about 1500 nurse and nurse residency programs across the VA, McDonough said but has plans for expanding to 5 times its current scope. He also addressed the question of a looming physician shortage: “Roughly 7 in 10 doctors in the United States will have had some portion of their training in a VA facility. We have to maintain that training function going forward.” The VA trains doctors, he added, “better than anybody else.”
The onboarding event will serve as a “national signal that we take this priority very seriously,” Elnahal said. “This will be not only a chance to have a step function improvement in the number of folks on board, which is an urgent priority, but to also set the groundwork for the more longitudinal work that we will need to do to improve the hiring process.”
Bulking up the workforce, he said, is “still far and away among our first priorities. Because if we don’t get our hospitals and facility staffed, it’s going to be a really hard effort to make process on the other priorities.”
In an intensive push to fill acute workforce shortages, the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is holding a “national onboarding surge event” the week of November 14. The goal is to get people who have already said yes to a job in the VA on that job more quickly. Every VA facility has been asked to submit a list of the highest-priority candidates, regardless of the position.
One of the most pressing reasons for getting more workers into the pipeline faster is that more and more veterans are entering VA care. As of October 1, tens of thousands of veterans will be eligible for VA health care, thanks to the Sergeant First Class Heath Robinson Honoring our Promise to Address Comprehensive Toxics Act of 2022 (PACT Act), passed in August, which expanded benefits for post-9/11 service members with illnesses due to toxic exposures.
Another reason is the need to fill the gaps left by attrition. In an October 19 press briefing, VA Undersecretary for Health Shereef Elnahal said the agency needs to hire about 52,000 employees per year just to keep up with the rate of health care professionals (HCPs) leaving the agency. At a September breakfast meeting with the Defense Writers Group, VA Secretary Denis McDonough said July 2022 marked the first month this year that the VA hired more nurses than it lost to retirement. He said the VA needs to hire 45,000 nurses over the next 3 years to keep up with attrition and growing demand for veteran care.
“We have to do a better job on hiring,” McDonough said. Streamlining the process is a major goal. Hiring rules loosened during the pandemic have since tightened back up. He pointed out that in many cases, the VA takes 90 to 100 days to onboard candidates and called the long-drawn-out process “being dragged through a bureaucratic morass.” During that time, he said, “They’re not being paid, they’re filling out paperwork… That’s disastrous.” In his press briefing, Elnahal said “we lose folks after we’ve made the selection” because the process is so long.
Moreover, the agency has a critical shortage not only of HCPs but the human resources professionals needed to fast-track the hirees’ progress. McDonough called it a “supply chain issue.” “We have the lowest ratio of human resource professionals per employee in the federal government by a long shot.” Partly, he said, because “a lot of our people end up hired away to other federal agencies.”
McDonough said the VA is also interested in transitioning more active-duty service members with in-demand skills, certifications, and talent into the VA workforce. “Cross-walking active duty into VA service much more aggressively,” he said, is another way to “grow that supply of ready, deployable, trained personnel.” The PACT Act gives the VA new incentives to entice workers, such as expanded recruitment, retention bonuses, and student loan repayment. The VA already provides training to about 1500 nurse and nurse residency programs across the VA, McDonough said but has plans for expanding to 5 times its current scope. He also addressed the question of a looming physician shortage: “Roughly 7 in 10 doctors in the United States will have had some portion of their training in a VA facility. We have to maintain that training function going forward.” The VA trains doctors, he added, “better than anybody else.”
The onboarding event will serve as a “national signal that we take this priority very seriously,” Elnahal said. “This will be not only a chance to have a step function improvement in the number of folks on board, which is an urgent priority, but to also set the groundwork for the more longitudinal work that we will need to do to improve the hiring process.”
Bulking up the workforce, he said, is “still far and away among our first priorities. Because if we don’t get our hospitals and facility staffed, it’s going to be a really hard effort to make process on the other priorities.”
In an intensive push to fill acute workforce shortages, the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is holding a “national onboarding surge event” the week of November 14. The goal is to get people who have already said yes to a job in the VA on that job more quickly. Every VA facility has been asked to submit a list of the highest-priority candidates, regardless of the position.
One of the most pressing reasons for getting more workers into the pipeline faster is that more and more veterans are entering VA care. As of October 1, tens of thousands of veterans will be eligible for VA health care, thanks to the Sergeant First Class Heath Robinson Honoring our Promise to Address Comprehensive Toxics Act of 2022 (PACT Act), passed in August, which expanded benefits for post-9/11 service members with illnesses due to toxic exposures.
Another reason is the need to fill the gaps left by attrition. In an October 19 press briefing, VA Undersecretary for Health Shereef Elnahal said the agency needs to hire about 52,000 employees per year just to keep up with the rate of health care professionals (HCPs) leaving the agency. At a September breakfast meeting with the Defense Writers Group, VA Secretary Denis McDonough said July 2022 marked the first month this year that the VA hired more nurses than it lost to retirement. He said the VA needs to hire 45,000 nurses over the next 3 years to keep up with attrition and growing demand for veteran care.
“We have to do a better job on hiring,” McDonough said. Streamlining the process is a major goal. Hiring rules loosened during the pandemic have since tightened back up. He pointed out that in many cases, the VA takes 90 to 100 days to onboard candidates and called the long-drawn-out process “being dragged through a bureaucratic morass.” During that time, he said, “They’re not being paid, they’re filling out paperwork… That’s disastrous.” In his press briefing, Elnahal said “we lose folks after we’ve made the selection” because the process is so long.
Moreover, the agency has a critical shortage not only of HCPs but the human resources professionals needed to fast-track the hirees’ progress. McDonough called it a “supply chain issue.” “We have the lowest ratio of human resource professionals per employee in the federal government by a long shot.” Partly, he said, because “a lot of our people end up hired away to other federal agencies.”
McDonough said the VA is also interested in transitioning more active-duty service members with in-demand skills, certifications, and talent into the VA workforce. “Cross-walking active duty into VA service much more aggressively,” he said, is another way to “grow that supply of ready, deployable, trained personnel.” The PACT Act gives the VA new incentives to entice workers, such as expanded recruitment, retention bonuses, and student loan repayment. The VA already provides training to about 1500 nurse and nurse residency programs across the VA, McDonough said but has plans for expanding to 5 times its current scope. He also addressed the question of a looming physician shortage: “Roughly 7 in 10 doctors in the United States will have had some portion of their training in a VA facility. We have to maintain that training function going forward.” The VA trains doctors, he added, “better than anybody else.”
The onboarding event will serve as a “national signal that we take this priority very seriously,” Elnahal said. “This will be not only a chance to have a step function improvement in the number of folks on board, which is an urgent priority, but to also set the groundwork for the more longitudinal work that we will need to do to improve the hiring process.”
Bulking up the workforce, he said, is “still far and away among our first priorities. Because if we don’t get our hospitals and facility staffed, it’s going to be a really hard effort to make process on the other priorities.”
Recurrent urinary tract infections: What’s good prophylaxis?
For those affected, recurrent urinary tract infections (UTIs) are sometimes stressful. However, even an informative discussion about risk factors and the imparting of behavioral recommendations can be very helpful for many women. Antibiotic prophylaxis should only be considered once all nonantibiotic therapy options have been exhausted.
One in seven women suffers at least once a year from cystitis. Around a third of those women develop a further urinary tract infection 6-12 months after the first infection. A urinary tract infection is classified as recurrent if two symptomatic episodes have occurred within the last 6 months or if three episodes have occurred within the last 12 months.
There are many different approaches to reducing the recurrence rate of urinary tract infections, Daniel Klussmann and Florian Wagenlehner, MD, of the department and outpatient clinic for urology at the University of Giessen (Germany) wrote in DMW Klinischer Fortschritt. Aside from general information and advice,
Fluids and D-mannose
An individual consultation discussion is the most important nonantibiotic strategy. Studies have shown that this strategy alone can lower the frequency of recurrent UTIs. According to the authors, special education programs on the causes and behavioral measures are especially helpful. Included in these programs is the recommendation to drink a sufficient, but not excessive, amount of fluids: approximately 1.5 liters per day. In one randomized study, this level of consumption halved UTI frequency. However, drinking an excessive amount of fluids should also be avoided, otherwise the antimicrobial peptides present in the urine become overly diluted.
The regular consumption of fruit juice, especially of that from berries, is also beneficial, according to the authors. However, study results on long-term prevention using cranberry products are inconsistent, and they are not recommended in the updated guideline. Like cranberries, D-mannose also inhibits the fimbriae of the Escherichia coli bacteria and therefore the bacteria’s ability to bind to the bladder epithelium. The authors cite a study in which, following the intake of 2 g of D-mannose dissolved in a glass of water every day, the rate of urinary tract infections dropped significantly, compared with consumption of placebo.
Additional recommendations in the S3 guideline include various phytotherapeutic products such as bearberry leaves, nasturtium herb, or horseradish root, although studies on the comparability of phytotherapeutic agents are very difficult to execute, the authors conceded.
It is already known that there is a positive correlation (by a factor of 60) between the recurrence rate of UTIs and the frequency of sexual intercourse. Even with contraceptive methods (such as vaginal suppositories, diaphragms or condoms coated with spermicide, and intrauterine devices), the risk of urinary tract infections increases by a factor of 2-14. Sexual abstinence, even if temporary, can be a remedy. Evidence for the recommendation to urinate immediately after coitus is contradictory in the literature, however. Excessive intimate hygiene clearly damages the local protective environment.
Estrogen substitution beneficial
For postmenopausal women, there is also the option of local estriol substitution (0.5 mg/day) as another nonantibiotic method of prophylaxis. This treatment serves as therapy for vaginal atrophy and reduces both vaginal colonization with uropathogens and the vaginal pH level. The authors cite Scandinavian studies that detected no increase in the risk of breast cancer from the local application of estriol.
Furthermore, the current guidelines recommend oral immunostimulation with bacterial cell wall components from uropathogenic strains of E. coli (OM-89, Uro-Vaxom). The authors reported on two meta-studies in which the average recurrence rate was reduced by 39%, compared with placebo. In addition, the treatment time for breakthrough infections decreased significantly, and prevention with OM-89 could even be started during acute therapy. Also recommended is parenteral immunostimulation with inactivated pathogens (StroVac). Acupuncture as cutaneous immunostimulation has also displayed a positive protective effect.
Only when nonantibiotic therapy fails and the patient is under a high amount of psychological strain should antibiotic prophylaxis be initiated, according to the authors. A period of 3-6 months should be the target here. When choosing an antibiotic and before starting therapy, the corresponding pathogen should be confirmed through a urine culture, and resistance testing should be performed. On the other hand, single-use, postcoital antibiotic prevention could be an alternative, particularly for women in whom a correlation between recurrent UTIs and sexual intercourse has been suspected, the authors wrote.
This article was translated from Univadis Germany. A version appeared on Medscape.com.
For those affected, recurrent urinary tract infections (UTIs) are sometimes stressful. However, even an informative discussion about risk factors and the imparting of behavioral recommendations can be very helpful for many women. Antibiotic prophylaxis should only be considered once all nonantibiotic therapy options have been exhausted.
One in seven women suffers at least once a year from cystitis. Around a third of those women develop a further urinary tract infection 6-12 months after the first infection. A urinary tract infection is classified as recurrent if two symptomatic episodes have occurred within the last 6 months or if three episodes have occurred within the last 12 months.
There are many different approaches to reducing the recurrence rate of urinary tract infections, Daniel Klussmann and Florian Wagenlehner, MD, of the department and outpatient clinic for urology at the University of Giessen (Germany) wrote in DMW Klinischer Fortschritt. Aside from general information and advice,
Fluids and D-mannose
An individual consultation discussion is the most important nonantibiotic strategy. Studies have shown that this strategy alone can lower the frequency of recurrent UTIs. According to the authors, special education programs on the causes and behavioral measures are especially helpful. Included in these programs is the recommendation to drink a sufficient, but not excessive, amount of fluids: approximately 1.5 liters per day. In one randomized study, this level of consumption halved UTI frequency. However, drinking an excessive amount of fluids should also be avoided, otherwise the antimicrobial peptides present in the urine become overly diluted.
The regular consumption of fruit juice, especially of that from berries, is also beneficial, according to the authors. However, study results on long-term prevention using cranberry products are inconsistent, and they are not recommended in the updated guideline. Like cranberries, D-mannose also inhibits the fimbriae of the Escherichia coli bacteria and therefore the bacteria’s ability to bind to the bladder epithelium. The authors cite a study in which, following the intake of 2 g of D-mannose dissolved in a glass of water every day, the rate of urinary tract infections dropped significantly, compared with consumption of placebo.
Additional recommendations in the S3 guideline include various phytotherapeutic products such as bearberry leaves, nasturtium herb, or horseradish root, although studies on the comparability of phytotherapeutic agents are very difficult to execute, the authors conceded.
It is already known that there is a positive correlation (by a factor of 60) between the recurrence rate of UTIs and the frequency of sexual intercourse. Even with contraceptive methods (such as vaginal suppositories, diaphragms or condoms coated with spermicide, and intrauterine devices), the risk of urinary tract infections increases by a factor of 2-14. Sexual abstinence, even if temporary, can be a remedy. Evidence for the recommendation to urinate immediately after coitus is contradictory in the literature, however. Excessive intimate hygiene clearly damages the local protective environment.
Estrogen substitution beneficial
For postmenopausal women, there is also the option of local estriol substitution (0.5 mg/day) as another nonantibiotic method of prophylaxis. This treatment serves as therapy for vaginal atrophy and reduces both vaginal colonization with uropathogens and the vaginal pH level. The authors cite Scandinavian studies that detected no increase in the risk of breast cancer from the local application of estriol.
Furthermore, the current guidelines recommend oral immunostimulation with bacterial cell wall components from uropathogenic strains of E. coli (OM-89, Uro-Vaxom). The authors reported on two meta-studies in which the average recurrence rate was reduced by 39%, compared with placebo. In addition, the treatment time for breakthrough infections decreased significantly, and prevention with OM-89 could even be started during acute therapy. Also recommended is parenteral immunostimulation with inactivated pathogens (StroVac). Acupuncture as cutaneous immunostimulation has also displayed a positive protective effect.
Only when nonantibiotic therapy fails and the patient is under a high amount of psychological strain should antibiotic prophylaxis be initiated, according to the authors. A period of 3-6 months should be the target here. When choosing an antibiotic and before starting therapy, the corresponding pathogen should be confirmed through a urine culture, and resistance testing should be performed. On the other hand, single-use, postcoital antibiotic prevention could be an alternative, particularly for women in whom a correlation between recurrent UTIs and sexual intercourse has been suspected, the authors wrote.
This article was translated from Univadis Germany. A version appeared on Medscape.com.
For those affected, recurrent urinary tract infections (UTIs) are sometimes stressful. However, even an informative discussion about risk factors and the imparting of behavioral recommendations can be very helpful for many women. Antibiotic prophylaxis should only be considered once all nonantibiotic therapy options have been exhausted.
One in seven women suffers at least once a year from cystitis. Around a third of those women develop a further urinary tract infection 6-12 months after the first infection. A urinary tract infection is classified as recurrent if two symptomatic episodes have occurred within the last 6 months or if three episodes have occurred within the last 12 months.
There are many different approaches to reducing the recurrence rate of urinary tract infections, Daniel Klussmann and Florian Wagenlehner, MD, of the department and outpatient clinic for urology at the University of Giessen (Germany) wrote in DMW Klinischer Fortschritt. Aside from general information and advice,
Fluids and D-mannose
An individual consultation discussion is the most important nonantibiotic strategy. Studies have shown that this strategy alone can lower the frequency of recurrent UTIs. According to the authors, special education programs on the causes and behavioral measures are especially helpful. Included in these programs is the recommendation to drink a sufficient, but not excessive, amount of fluids: approximately 1.5 liters per day. In one randomized study, this level of consumption halved UTI frequency. However, drinking an excessive amount of fluids should also be avoided, otherwise the antimicrobial peptides present in the urine become overly diluted.
The regular consumption of fruit juice, especially of that from berries, is also beneficial, according to the authors. However, study results on long-term prevention using cranberry products are inconsistent, and they are not recommended in the updated guideline. Like cranberries, D-mannose also inhibits the fimbriae of the Escherichia coli bacteria and therefore the bacteria’s ability to bind to the bladder epithelium. The authors cite a study in which, following the intake of 2 g of D-mannose dissolved in a glass of water every day, the rate of urinary tract infections dropped significantly, compared with consumption of placebo.
Additional recommendations in the S3 guideline include various phytotherapeutic products such as bearberry leaves, nasturtium herb, or horseradish root, although studies on the comparability of phytotherapeutic agents are very difficult to execute, the authors conceded.
It is already known that there is a positive correlation (by a factor of 60) between the recurrence rate of UTIs and the frequency of sexual intercourse. Even with contraceptive methods (such as vaginal suppositories, diaphragms or condoms coated with spermicide, and intrauterine devices), the risk of urinary tract infections increases by a factor of 2-14. Sexual abstinence, even if temporary, can be a remedy. Evidence for the recommendation to urinate immediately after coitus is contradictory in the literature, however. Excessive intimate hygiene clearly damages the local protective environment.
Estrogen substitution beneficial
For postmenopausal women, there is also the option of local estriol substitution (0.5 mg/day) as another nonantibiotic method of prophylaxis. This treatment serves as therapy for vaginal atrophy and reduces both vaginal colonization with uropathogens and the vaginal pH level. The authors cite Scandinavian studies that detected no increase in the risk of breast cancer from the local application of estriol.
Furthermore, the current guidelines recommend oral immunostimulation with bacterial cell wall components from uropathogenic strains of E. coli (OM-89, Uro-Vaxom). The authors reported on two meta-studies in which the average recurrence rate was reduced by 39%, compared with placebo. In addition, the treatment time for breakthrough infections decreased significantly, and prevention with OM-89 could even be started during acute therapy. Also recommended is parenteral immunostimulation with inactivated pathogens (StroVac). Acupuncture as cutaneous immunostimulation has also displayed a positive protective effect.
Only when nonantibiotic therapy fails and the patient is under a high amount of psychological strain should antibiotic prophylaxis be initiated, according to the authors. A period of 3-6 months should be the target here. When choosing an antibiotic and before starting therapy, the corresponding pathogen should be confirmed through a urine culture, and resistance testing should be performed. On the other hand, single-use, postcoital antibiotic prevention could be an alternative, particularly for women in whom a correlation between recurrent UTIs and sexual intercourse has been suspected, the authors wrote.
This article was translated from Univadis Germany. A version appeared on Medscape.com.
FROM DMW KLINISCHER FORTSCHRITT
Metabolites may distinguish severe subtypes of PAH
, based on data from approximately 1,500 individuals.
The overall prognosis and therapeutic response for patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension associated with systemic sclerosis (SSc-PAH) tends to be worse than for patients with other types of PAH, such as idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension (IPAH), but the impact of different metabolite profiles among subtypes of disease has not been explored, wrote Mona Alotaibi, MD, of the University of California, San Diego, and colleagues.
“Recently, metabolic dysregulation has been proposed as a key mechanism by which IPAH and SSc-PAH differ and could control such disparities,” they noted. Clarifying the molecular mechanisms of SSc-PAH could inform management and treatment, they added.
In a study published in the journal Chest, the researchers sought to identify a bioactive lipid signature unique to SSc-PAH. They identified 400 patients with SSc-PAH and 1,082 with IPAH. An additional 100 patients with scleroderma but no PH and 44 patients with scleroderma who had PH were included for external validation. The mean ages of the patients with IPAH and SSc-PAH in the discovery and validation cohorts ranged from approximately 51 to 65 years; more than 75% of patients across the groups were women.
The researchers tested more than 700 bioactive lipid metabolites using liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry. They found five metabolites that distinguished SSc-PAH and IPAH that were significantly associated with markers of disease severity: 17-beta estradiol, novel Eic, nervonic acid, fatty acid esters of hydroxy fatty acids, and prostaglandin F2 alpha (PGF 2 alpha).
The biomarkers were increased in SSc-PAH patients compared to patients with SSC alone, which suggests that the biomarkers are related to PAH and not to scleroderma alone, the researchers noted.
In particular, nervonic acid was associated with worse functional capacity, in SSc-PAH patients, as were higher levels of 17-beta estradiol and prostaglandin F2 alpha. Also, 17-beta estradiol was associated with lower cardiac impairment (CI) and stroke volume index (SVI) in SSc-PAH patients, but higher SVI in IPAH patients. PGF 2 alpha was associated with lower CI and SVI and higher pulmonary vascular resistance in SSc-PAH and IPAH combined.
The study findings were limited by several factors including the inability to adjust for all potential confounders between IPAH and SSc-PAH, and the fact that a clear causal relationship could not be determined, the researchers noted. Inadequate statistical power to analyze SSc-PAH data was another limitation, and studies with detailed scleroderma phenotypes are needed to validate the results, they said.
However, the current study provides insight on the metabolic differences in SSc-PAH and the potential impact on disease pathology that may inform diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment strategies for SSc-PAH patients, they concluded.
The study was supported by the National Institutes of Health. Several individual investigators received support from organizations including the American Heart Association and the Chest Foundation, and from companies including Livanova, Equillium, Corvus, Bayer, and Actelion, but the authors had no relevant financial conflicts to disclose.
, based on data from approximately 1,500 individuals.
The overall prognosis and therapeutic response for patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension associated with systemic sclerosis (SSc-PAH) tends to be worse than for patients with other types of PAH, such as idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension (IPAH), but the impact of different metabolite profiles among subtypes of disease has not been explored, wrote Mona Alotaibi, MD, of the University of California, San Diego, and colleagues.
“Recently, metabolic dysregulation has been proposed as a key mechanism by which IPAH and SSc-PAH differ and could control such disparities,” they noted. Clarifying the molecular mechanisms of SSc-PAH could inform management and treatment, they added.
In a study published in the journal Chest, the researchers sought to identify a bioactive lipid signature unique to SSc-PAH. They identified 400 patients with SSc-PAH and 1,082 with IPAH. An additional 100 patients with scleroderma but no PH and 44 patients with scleroderma who had PH were included for external validation. The mean ages of the patients with IPAH and SSc-PAH in the discovery and validation cohorts ranged from approximately 51 to 65 years; more than 75% of patients across the groups were women.
The researchers tested more than 700 bioactive lipid metabolites using liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry. They found five metabolites that distinguished SSc-PAH and IPAH that were significantly associated with markers of disease severity: 17-beta estradiol, novel Eic, nervonic acid, fatty acid esters of hydroxy fatty acids, and prostaglandin F2 alpha (PGF 2 alpha).
The biomarkers were increased in SSc-PAH patients compared to patients with SSC alone, which suggests that the biomarkers are related to PAH and not to scleroderma alone, the researchers noted.
In particular, nervonic acid was associated with worse functional capacity, in SSc-PAH patients, as were higher levels of 17-beta estradiol and prostaglandin F2 alpha. Also, 17-beta estradiol was associated with lower cardiac impairment (CI) and stroke volume index (SVI) in SSc-PAH patients, but higher SVI in IPAH patients. PGF 2 alpha was associated with lower CI and SVI and higher pulmonary vascular resistance in SSc-PAH and IPAH combined.
The study findings were limited by several factors including the inability to adjust for all potential confounders between IPAH and SSc-PAH, and the fact that a clear causal relationship could not be determined, the researchers noted. Inadequate statistical power to analyze SSc-PAH data was another limitation, and studies with detailed scleroderma phenotypes are needed to validate the results, they said.
However, the current study provides insight on the metabolic differences in SSc-PAH and the potential impact on disease pathology that may inform diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment strategies for SSc-PAH patients, they concluded.
The study was supported by the National Institutes of Health. Several individual investigators received support from organizations including the American Heart Association and the Chest Foundation, and from companies including Livanova, Equillium, Corvus, Bayer, and Actelion, but the authors had no relevant financial conflicts to disclose.
, based on data from approximately 1,500 individuals.
The overall prognosis and therapeutic response for patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension associated with systemic sclerosis (SSc-PAH) tends to be worse than for patients with other types of PAH, such as idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension (IPAH), but the impact of different metabolite profiles among subtypes of disease has not been explored, wrote Mona Alotaibi, MD, of the University of California, San Diego, and colleagues.
“Recently, metabolic dysregulation has been proposed as a key mechanism by which IPAH and SSc-PAH differ and could control such disparities,” they noted. Clarifying the molecular mechanisms of SSc-PAH could inform management and treatment, they added.
In a study published in the journal Chest, the researchers sought to identify a bioactive lipid signature unique to SSc-PAH. They identified 400 patients with SSc-PAH and 1,082 with IPAH. An additional 100 patients with scleroderma but no PH and 44 patients with scleroderma who had PH were included for external validation. The mean ages of the patients with IPAH and SSc-PAH in the discovery and validation cohorts ranged from approximately 51 to 65 years; more than 75% of patients across the groups were women.
The researchers tested more than 700 bioactive lipid metabolites using liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry. They found five metabolites that distinguished SSc-PAH and IPAH that were significantly associated with markers of disease severity: 17-beta estradiol, novel Eic, nervonic acid, fatty acid esters of hydroxy fatty acids, and prostaglandin F2 alpha (PGF 2 alpha).
The biomarkers were increased in SSc-PAH patients compared to patients with SSC alone, which suggests that the biomarkers are related to PAH and not to scleroderma alone, the researchers noted.
In particular, nervonic acid was associated with worse functional capacity, in SSc-PAH patients, as were higher levels of 17-beta estradiol and prostaglandin F2 alpha. Also, 17-beta estradiol was associated with lower cardiac impairment (CI) and stroke volume index (SVI) in SSc-PAH patients, but higher SVI in IPAH patients. PGF 2 alpha was associated with lower CI and SVI and higher pulmonary vascular resistance in SSc-PAH and IPAH combined.
The study findings were limited by several factors including the inability to adjust for all potential confounders between IPAH and SSc-PAH, and the fact that a clear causal relationship could not be determined, the researchers noted. Inadequate statistical power to analyze SSc-PAH data was another limitation, and studies with detailed scleroderma phenotypes are needed to validate the results, they said.
However, the current study provides insight on the metabolic differences in SSc-PAH and the potential impact on disease pathology that may inform diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment strategies for SSc-PAH patients, they concluded.
The study was supported by the National Institutes of Health. Several individual investigators received support from organizations including the American Heart Association and the Chest Foundation, and from companies including Livanova, Equillium, Corvus, Bayer, and Actelion, but the authors had no relevant financial conflicts to disclose.
FROM CHEST
Sexual assault–related visits to the ED are on the rise
Data from the Federal Bureau of Investigation show an increase in reported rapes and sexual assaults (SAs) since 2006, and studies of victims show an increased risk of conditions such as suicidal ideation, PTSD, depression, substance use, and chronic conditions, write Emily L. Vogt of the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, and colleagues.
However, trends and disparities in ED use by adults seeking care following SA have not been explored, they said.
For a study that was published in JAMA Network Open, researchers reviewed data from the Nationwide Emergency Department Sample (NEDS), a large, nationally representative database managed by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. The dataset consisted of 120 million to 143 million weighted ED visits reported annually from 2006 through 2016. The study population included adults aged 18-65 years who had made an ED visit that was recorded in the NEDS and that was coded as an SA. SA was defined using ICD-9 codes until the fourth quarter of 2015, at which time ICD-10 codes came into use.
Overall, the number of SA-related ED visits increased by 1,533.0% during the study period, from 3,607 in 2006 to 55,296 in 2019. The average annual percentage change was 23.0% (P < .001). The greatest increase occurred from 2015 to 2016, when annual visits increased from 17,709 to 47,732. This increase likely reflected the updated ICD-10 codes, in which there are categories for suspected adult rape, confirmed adult rape, and adult forced sexual exploitation, the researchers note.
Patients presenting to the ED after an SA were mainly women (91.5%). Individuals aged 18-25 years accounted for nearly half of the presentations. Individuals in the lowest and second-lowest income quartiles also were overrepresented.
Despite the increased presentation to EDs, admission rates for SA decreased, from 12.6% to 4.3%, the researchers note. Patients who were older and were insured through Medicaid were more likely to be admitted than persons of other demographic groups.
The researchers also found that increases in ED presentations outpaced increases in SA reports to law enforcement. They compared the ED trends with FBI-reported rapes/SAs from 2015 to 2019 and found increases of 7% and 22% during the times of ICD-9 and ICD-10 codes, respectively. However, in 2019, the number of SA survivors who sought ED care remained below the number who reported to law enforcement (55,296 vs. 139,815, as determined on the basis of revised SA definitions).
“Although the association between increased coding specificity and documentation of SA is still unclear, ICD-10 likely contributed to increased ED documentation of SA,” but the data show steady increases that are independent of the coding change, the researchers write.
The study findings were limited by several factors, including the potential for multiple representations of patients, coding errors associated with the NEDS database, and the reliance on voluntary reports in the NEDS and FBI datasets, the researchers note. The results were strengthened by the large, diverse sample size and by the inclusion of hospital admissions and crime data for comparison, they say.
“As few as 21% of survivors seek medical care after SA, meaning that the survivors captured in this study represent a fraction of total SA-related care need,” the researchers write. “Our finding that most SA ED visits are by young, female, and low-income survivors can inform policy changes to better support these individuals,” which could include the development of outpatient and longitudinal care settings to better serve these populations, they conclude.
Better understanding not only of the trends underlying SA reporting but also of the demographics of survivors who seek treatment and evaluation after SA is vital, said Robert Glatter, MD, in an interview.
“Being able to better understand how social and societal movements affect a patient’s comfort in reporting an SA is vital in tracking the numbers of people who seek care in the ED,” said Dr. Glatter, an emergency medicine physician at Lenox Hill Hospital at Northwell Health, New York, and also of Hofstra University, Hempstead, N.Y.
Dr. Glatter said he was not surprised by the significant increase in sexual assault presentations, especially in light of increased awareness and the influence of the #MeToo movement and other social justice movements over the past decade.
“While I believe that victims of sexual violence may now feel more empowered to report an assault, the volume of SA that go unreported remains a serious public health issue and concern” in the United States and globally, he emphasized.
A key message from the current study is that there is a need for investment in “compassionate and comprehensive care for all survivors of SA,” Dr. Glatter said. “This includes recognition of the extensive mental health consequences of SA that can lead to not only depression, PTSD, and anxiety but also to suicidal ideation and suicide. The longer-term medical effects become life altering, permeating families and future generations,” he emphasized.
“As a society, we must also place a strong emphasis on caring for all SA survivors, but particularly those who come from economically or socially disadvantaged backgrounds who are uninsured or underinsured,” Dr. Glatter said. Issues of race, gender identity, and sexual identity among SA survivors also must be taken into consideration, he added.
“We need to better understand how our health care system can provide more nuanced follow-up care and reporting for survivors in outpatient settings. … Making access easier, while ensuring confidentiality, will allow more survivors of SA to seek treatment and care,” he said. “We also need to understand how using forensic nurses in this capacity, and beyond the ED, can better serve minority and racially diverse communities” and to increase the recruitment and training of such specialized nurses to care for SA victims, Dr. Glatter noted.
The study was supported by internal funding from the University of Michigan and the department of obstetrics and gynecology. Corresponding author Erica C. Marsh, MD, has received personal fees from Myovant Sciences and Pfizer unrelated to the current study. Dr. Glatter has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Data from the Federal Bureau of Investigation show an increase in reported rapes and sexual assaults (SAs) since 2006, and studies of victims show an increased risk of conditions such as suicidal ideation, PTSD, depression, substance use, and chronic conditions, write Emily L. Vogt of the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, and colleagues.
However, trends and disparities in ED use by adults seeking care following SA have not been explored, they said.
For a study that was published in JAMA Network Open, researchers reviewed data from the Nationwide Emergency Department Sample (NEDS), a large, nationally representative database managed by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. The dataset consisted of 120 million to 143 million weighted ED visits reported annually from 2006 through 2016. The study population included adults aged 18-65 years who had made an ED visit that was recorded in the NEDS and that was coded as an SA. SA was defined using ICD-9 codes until the fourth quarter of 2015, at which time ICD-10 codes came into use.
Overall, the number of SA-related ED visits increased by 1,533.0% during the study period, from 3,607 in 2006 to 55,296 in 2019. The average annual percentage change was 23.0% (P < .001). The greatest increase occurred from 2015 to 2016, when annual visits increased from 17,709 to 47,732. This increase likely reflected the updated ICD-10 codes, in which there are categories for suspected adult rape, confirmed adult rape, and adult forced sexual exploitation, the researchers note.
Patients presenting to the ED after an SA were mainly women (91.5%). Individuals aged 18-25 years accounted for nearly half of the presentations. Individuals in the lowest and second-lowest income quartiles also were overrepresented.
Despite the increased presentation to EDs, admission rates for SA decreased, from 12.6% to 4.3%, the researchers note. Patients who were older and were insured through Medicaid were more likely to be admitted than persons of other demographic groups.
The researchers also found that increases in ED presentations outpaced increases in SA reports to law enforcement. They compared the ED trends with FBI-reported rapes/SAs from 2015 to 2019 and found increases of 7% and 22% during the times of ICD-9 and ICD-10 codes, respectively. However, in 2019, the number of SA survivors who sought ED care remained below the number who reported to law enforcement (55,296 vs. 139,815, as determined on the basis of revised SA definitions).
“Although the association between increased coding specificity and documentation of SA is still unclear, ICD-10 likely contributed to increased ED documentation of SA,” but the data show steady increases that are independent of the coding change, the researchers write.
The study findings were limited by several factors, including the potential for multiple representations of patients, coding errors associated with the NEDS database, and the reliance on voluntary reports in the NEDS and FBI datasets, the researchers note. The results were strengthened by the large, diverse sample size and by the inclusion of hospital admissions and crime data for comparison, they say.
“As few as 21% of survivors seek medical care after SA, meaning that the survivors captured in this study represent a fraction of total SA-related care need,” the researchers write. “Our finding that most SA ED visits are by young, female, and low-income survivors can inform policy changes to better support these individuals,” which could include the development of outpatient and longitudinal care settings to better serve these populations, they conclude.
Better understanding not only of the trends underlying SA reporting but also of the demographics of survivors who seek treatment and evaluation after SA is vital, said Robert Glatter, MD, in an interview.
“Being able to better understand how social and societal movements affect a patient’s comfort in reporting an SA is vital in tracking the numbers of people who seek care in the ED,” said Dr. Glatter, an emergency medicine physician at Lenox Hill Hospital at Northwell Health, New York, and also of Hofstra University, Hempstead, N.Y.
Dr. Glatter said he was not surprised by the significant increase in sexual assault presentations, especially in light of increased awareness and the influence of the #MeToo movement and other social justice movements over the past decade.
“While I believe that victims of sexual violence may now feel more empowered to report an assault, the volume of SA that go unreported remains a serious public health issue and concern” in the United States and globally, he emphasized.
A key message from the current study is that there is a need for investment in “compassionate and comprehensive care for all survivors of SA,” Dr. Glatter said. “This includes recognition of the extensive mental health consequences of SA that can lead to not only depression, PTSD, and anxiety but also to suicidal ideation and suicide. The longer-term medical effects become life altering, permeating families and future generations,” he emphasized.
“As a society, we must also place a strong emphasis on caring for all SA survivors, but particularly those who come from economically or socially disadvantaged backgrounds who are uninsured or underinsured,” Dr. Glatter said. Issues of race, gender identity, and sexual identity among SA survivors also must be taken into consideration, he added.
“We need to better understand how our health care system can provide more nuanced follow-up care and reporting for survivors in outpatient settings. … Making access easier, while ensuring confidentiality, will allow more survivors of SA to seek treatment and care,” he said. “We also need to understand how using forensic nurses in this capacity, and beyond the ED, can better serve minority and racially diverse communities” and to increase the recruitment and training of such specialized nurses to care for SA victims, Dr. Glatter noted.
The study was supported by internal funding from the University of Michigan and the department of obstetrics and gynecology. Corresponding author Erica C. Marsh, MD, has received personal fees from Myovant Sciences and Pfizer unrelated to the current study. Dr. Glatter has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Data from the Federal Bureau of Investigation show an increase in reported rapes and sexual assaults (SAs) since 2006, and studies of victims show an increased risk of conditions such as suicidal ideation, PTSD, depression, substance use, and chronic conditions, write Emily L. Vogt of the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, and colleagues.
However, trends and disparities in ED use by adults seeking care following SA have not been explored, they said.
For a study that was published in JAMA Network Open, researchers reviewed data from the Nationwide Emergency Department Sample (NEDS), a large, nationally representative database managed by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. The dataset consisted of 120 million to 143 million weighted ED visits reported annually from 2006 through 2016. The study population included adults aged 18-65 years who had made an ED visit that was recorded in the NEDS and that was coded as an SA. SA was defined using ICD-9 codes until the fourth quarter of 2015, at which time ICD-10 codes came into use.
Overall, the number of SA-related ED visits increased by 1,533.0% during the study period, from 3,607 in 2006 to 55,296 in 2019. The average annual percentage change was 23.0% (P < .001). The greatest increase occurred from 2015 to 2016, when annual visits increased from 17,709 to 47,732. This increase likely reflected the updated ICD-10 codes, in which there are categories for suspected adult rape, confirmed adult rape, and adult forced sexual exploitation, the researchers note.
Patients presenting to the ED after an SA were mainly women (91.5%). Individuals aged 18-25 years accounted for nearly half of the presentations. Individuals in the lowest and second-lowest income quartiles also were overrepresented.
Despite the increased presentation to EDs, admission rates for SA decreased, from 12.6% to 4.3%, the researchers note. Patients who were older and were insured through Medicaid were more likely to be admitted than persons of other demographic groups.
The researchers also found that increases in ED presentations outpaced increases in SA reports to law enforcement. They compared the ED trends with FBI-reported rapes/SAs from 2015 to 2019 and found increases of 7% and 22% during the times of ICD-9 and ICD-10 codes, respectively. However, in 2019, the number of SA survivors who sought ED care remained below the number who reported to law enforcement (55,296 vs. 139,815, as determined on the basis of revised SA definitions).
“Although the association between increased coding specificity and documentation of SA is still unclear, ICD-10 likely contributed to increased ED documentation of SA,” but the data show steady increases that are independent of the coding change, the researchers write.
The study findings were limited by several factors, including the potential for multiple representations of patients, coding errors associated with the NEDS database, and the reliance on voluntary reports in the NEDS and FBI datasets, the researchers note. The results were strengthened by the large, diverse sample size and by the inclusion of hospital admissions and crime data for comparison, they say.
“As few as 21% of survivors seek medical care after SA, meaning that the survivors captured in this study represent a fraction of total SA-related care need,” the researchers write. “Our finding that most SA ED visits are by young, female, and low-income survivors can inform policy changes to better support these individuals,” which could include the development of outpatient and longitudinal care settings to better serve these populations, they conclude.
Better understanding not only of the trends underlying SA reporting but also of the demographics of survivors who seek treatment and evaluation after SA is vital, said Robert Glatter, MD, in an interview.
“Being able to better understand how social and societal movements affect a patient’s comfort in reporting an SA is vital in tracking the numbers of people who seek care in the ED,” said Dr. Glatter, an emergency medicine physician at Lenox Hill Hospital at Northwell Health, New York, and also of Hofstra University, Hempstead, N.Y.
Dr. Glatter said he was not surprised by the significant increase in sexual assault presentations, especially in light of increased awareness and the influence of the #MeToo movement and other social justice movements over the past decade.
“While I believe that victims of sexual violence may now feel more empowered to report an assault, the volume of SA that go unreported remains a serious public health issue and concern” in the United States and globally, he emphasized.
A key message from the current study is that there is a need for investment in “compassionate and comprehensive care for all survivors of SA,” Dr. Glatter said. “This includes recognition of the extensive mental health consequences of SA that can lead to not only depression, PTSD, and anxiety but also to suicidal ideation and suicide. The longer-term medical effects become life altering, permeating families and future generations,” he emphasized.
“As a society, we must also place a strong emphasis on caring for all SA survivors, but particularly those who come from economically or socially disadvantaged backgrounds who are uninsured or underinsured,” Dr. Glatter said. Issues of race, gender identity, and sexual identity among SA survivors also must be taken into consideration, he added.
“We need to better understand how our health care system can provide more nuanced follow-up care and reporting for survivors in outpatient settings. … Making access easier, while ensuring confidentiality, will allow more survivors of SA to seek treatment and care,” he said. “We also need to understand how using forensic nurses in this capacity, and beyond the ED, can better serve minority and racially diverse communities” and to increase the recruitment and training of such specialized nurses to care for SA victims, Dr. Glatter noted.
The study was supported by internal funding from the University of Michigan and the department of obstetrics and gynecology. Corresponding author Erica C. Marsh, MD, has received personal fees from Myovant Sciences and Pfizer unrelated to the current study. Dr. Glatter has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
FROM JAMA NETWORK OPEN
Emergency contraception for psychiatric patients
Ms. A, age 22, is a college student who presents for an initial psychiatric evaluation. Her body mass index (BMI) is 20 (normal range: 18.5 to 24.9), and her medical history is positive only for childhood asthma. She has been treated for major depressive disorder with venlafaxine by her previous psychiatrist. While this antidepressant has been effective for some symptoms, she has experienced adverse effects and is interested in a different medication. During the evaluation, Ms. A remarks that she had a “scare” last night when the condom broke while having sex with her boyfriend. She says that she is interested in having children at some point, but not at present; she is concerned that getting pregnant now would cause her depression to “spiral out of control.”
Unwanted or mistimed pregnancies account for 45% of all pregnancies.1 While there are ramifications for any unintended pregnancy, the risks for patients with mental illness are greater and include potential adverse effects on the neonate from both psychiatric disease and psychiatric medication use, worse obstetrical outcomes for patients with untreated mental illness, and worsening of psychiatric symptoms and suicide risk in the peripartum period.2 These risks become even more pronounced when psychiatric medications are reflexively discontinued or reduced in pregnancy, which is commonly done contrary to best practice recommendations. In the United States, the recent Supreme Court decision in Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization has erased federal protections for abortion previously conferred by Roe v Wade. As a result, as of early October 2022, abortion had been made illegal in 11 states, and was likely to be banned in many others, most commonly in states where there is limited support for either parents or children. Thus, preventing unplanned pregnancies should be a treatment consideration for all medical disciplines.3
Psychiatrists may hesitate to prescribe emergency contraception (EC) due to fears it falls outside the scope of their practice. However, psychiatry has already moved towards prescribing nonpsychiatric medications when doing so clearly benefits the patient. One example is prescribing metformin to address metabolic syndrome related to the use of second-generation antipsychotics. Emergency contraceptives have strong safety profiles and are easy to prescribe. Unfortunately, there are many barriers to increasing access to emergency contraceptives for psychiatric patients.4 These include the erroneous belief that laboratory and physical exams are needed before starting EC, cost and/or limited stock of emergency contraceptives at pharmacies, and general confusion regarding what constitutes EC vs an oral abortive (Table 15-10). Psychiatrists are particularly well-positioned to support the reproductive autonomy and well-being of patients who struggle to engage with other clinicians. This article aims to help psychiatrists better understand EC so they can comfortably prescribe it before their patients need it.
What is emergency contraception?
EC is medications or devices that patients can use after sexual intercourse to prevent pregnancy. They do not impede the development of an established pregnancy and thus are not abortifacients. EC is not recommended as a primary means of contraception,9 but it can be extremely valuable to reduce pregnancy risk after unprotected intercourse or contraceptive failures such as broken condoms or missed doses of birth control pills. EC can prevent ≥95% of pregnancies when taken within 5 days of at-risk intercourse.11
Methods of EC fall into 2 categories: oral medications (sometimes referred to as “morning after pills”) and intrauterine devices (IUDs). IUDs are the most effective means of EC, especially for patients with higher BMIs or who may be taking medications such as cytochrome P450 (CYP)3A4 inducers that could interfere with the effectiveness of oral methods. IUDs also have the advantage of providing highly effective ongoing contraception.6 However, IUDs require in-office placement by a trained clinician, and patients may experience difficulty obtaining placement within 5 days of unprotected sex. Therefore, oral medication is the most common form of EC.
Oral EC is safe and effective, and professional societies (including the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists6 and the American Academy of Pediatrics7) recommend routinely prescribing oral EC for patients in advance of need. Advance prescribing eliminates barriers to accessing EC, increases the use of EC, and does not encourage risky sexual behaviors.10
Overview of oral emergency contraception
Two medications are FDA-approved for use as oral EC: ulipristal acetate and levonorgestrel. Both are available in generic and branded versions. While many common birth control pills can also be safely used off-label as emergency contraception (an approach known as the Yuzpe method), they are less effective, not as well-tolerated, and require knowledge of the specific type of pill the patient has available.9 Oral EC appears to work primarily through delay or inhibition of ovulation, and is unlikely to prevent implantation of a fertilized egg.9
Continue to: Ulipristal acetate
Ulipristal acetate (UPA) is an oral progesterone receptor agonist-antagonist taken as a single 30 mg dose up to 5 days after unprotected sex. Pregnancy rates from a single act of unprotected sex followed by UPA use range from 0% to 1.8%.4 Many pharmacies stock UPA, and others (especially chain pharmacies) report being able to order and fill it within 24 hours.12
Levonorgestrel (LNG) is an oral progestin that is available by prescription and has also been approved for over-the-counter sale to patients of all ages and sexes (without the need to show identification) since 2013.8 It is administered as a single 1.5 mg dose taken as soon as possible up to 3 days after unprotected sex, although it may continue to provide benefits when taken within 5 days. Pregnancy rates from a single act of unprotected sex followed by LNG use range from 0.3% to 2.6%, with much higher odds among women who are obese.4 LNG is available both by prescription or over-the-counter,13 although it is often kept in a locked cabinet or behind the counter, and staff are often misinformed regarding the lack of age restrictions for sale without a prescription.14
Safety and adverse effects. According to the CDC, there are no conditions for which the risks outweigh the advantages of use of either UPA or LNG,5 and patients for whom hormonal birth control is otherwise contraindicated can still use them safely. If a pregnancy has already occurred, taking EC will not harm the developing fetus; it is also safe to use when breastfeeding.5 Both medications are generally well-tolerated—neither has been causally linked to deaths or serious complications,5 and the most common adverse effects are headache (approximately 19%) and nausea (approximately 12%), in addition to irregular bleeding, fatigue, dizziness, and abdominal pain.15 Oral EC may be used more than once, even within the same menstrual cycle. Patients who use EC repeatedly should be encouraged to discuss more efficacious contraceptive options with their primary physician or gynecologist.
Will oral EC affect psychiatric treatment?
Oral EC is unlikely to have a meaningful effect on psychiatric symptoms or management, particularly when compared to the significant impacts of unintended pregnancies. Neither medication is known to have any clinically significant impacts on the pharmacokinetics or pharmacodynamics of psychotropic medications, although the effectiveness of both medications can be impaired by CYP3A4 inducers such as carbamazepine.5 In addition, while research has not specifically examined the impact of EC on psychiatric symptoms, the broader literature on hormonal contraception indicates that most patients with psychiatric disorders generally report similar or lower rates of mood symptoms associated with their use.16 Some women treated with hormonal contraceptives do develop dysphoric mood,16 but any such effects resulting from LNG would likely be transient. Mood disruptions or other psychiatric symptoms have not been associated with UPA use.
How to prescribe oral emergency contraception
Who and when. Women of reproductive age should be counseled about EC as part of anticipatory guidance, regardless of their current intentions for sexual behaviors. Patients do not need a physical examination or pregnancy test before being prescribed or using oral EC.9 Much like how intranasal naloxone is prescribed, prescriptions should be provided in advance of need, with multiple refills to facilitate ready access when needed.
Continue to: Which to prescribe
Which to prescribe. UPA is more effective in preventing pregnancy than LNG at all time points up to 120 hours after sex, including for women who are overweight or obese.15 As such, it is recommended as the first-line choice. However, because LNG is available without prescription and is more readily available (including via online order), it may be a good choice for patients who need rapid EC or who prefer a medication that does not require a prescription (Table 24,5,8,9,15).
What to tell patients. Patients should be instructed to fill their prescription before they expect to use it, to ensure ready availability when desired (Table 35,9). Oral EC is shelf stable for at least 3 years when stored in a cool, dry environment. Patients should take the medication as soon as possible following at-risk sexual intercourse (Table 4). Tell them that if they vomit within 3 hours of taking the medication, they should take a second dose. Remind patients that EC does not protect against sexually transmitted infections, or from sex that occurs after the medication is taken (in fact, they can increase the possibility of pregnancy later in that menstrual cycle due to delayed ovulation).9 Counsel patients to abstain from sex or to use barrier contraception for 7 days after use. Those who take birth control pills can resume use immediately after using LNG; they should wait 5 days after taking UPA.
No routine follow-up is needed after taking UPA or LNG. However, patients should get a pregnancy test if their period does not start within 3 weeks, and should seek medical evaluation if they experience significant lower abdominal pain or persistent irregular bleeding in order to rule out pregnancy-related complications. Patients who use EC repeatedly should be recommended to pursue routine contraceptive care.
Billing. Counseling your patients about contraception can increase the reimbursement you receive by adding to the complexity of the encounter (regardless of whether you prescribe a medication) through use of the ICD-10 code Z30.0.
Emergency contraception for special populations
Some patients face additional challenges to effective EC that should be considered when counseling and prescribing. Table 54,5,7,15,17-21 discusses the use of EC in these special populations. Of particular importance for psychiatrists, LNG is less effective at preventing undesired pregnancy among patients who are overweight or obese,15,17,18 and strong CYP3A4-inducing agents may decrease the effectiveness of both LNG and UPA.5 Keep in mind, however, that the advantages of using either UPA or LNG outweigh the risks for all populations.5 Patients must be aware of appropriate information in order to make informed decisions, but should not be discouraged from using EC.
Continue to: Other groups of patients...
Other groups of patients may face barriers due to some clinicians’ hesitancy regarding their ability to consent to reproductive care. Most patients with psychiatric illnesses have decision-making capacity regarding reproductive issues.22 Although EC is supported by the American Academy of Pediatrics,7 patients age <18 have varying rights to consent across states,21 and merit special consideration.
CASE CONTINUED
Ms. A does not wish to get pregnant at this time, and expresses fears that her recent contraceptive failure could lead to an unintended pregnancy. In addition to her psychiatric treatment, her psychiatrist should discuss EC options with her. She has a healthy BMI and had inadequately protected sex <1 day ago, so her clinician may prescribe LNG (to ensure rapid access for immediate use) in addition to UPA for her to have available in case of future “scares.” The psychiatrist should consider pharmacologic treatment with an antidepressant with a relatively safe reproductive record (eg, sertraline).23 This is considered preventive ethics, since Ms. A is of reproductive age, even if she is not presently planning to get pregnant, due to the aforementioned high rate of unplanned pregnancy.23,24 It is also important for the psychiatrist to continue the dialogue in future sessions about preventing unintended pregnancy. Since Ms. A has benefited from a psychotropic medication when not pregnant, it will be important to discuss with her the risks and benefits of medication should she plan a pregnancy.
Bottom Line
Patients with mental illnesses are at increased risk of adverse outcomes resulting from unintended pregnancies. Clinicians should counsel patients about emergency contraception (EC) as a part of routine psychiatric care, and should prescribe oral EC in advance of patient need to facilitate effective use.
Related Resources
- American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Practice Bulletin on Emergency Contraception. https://www.acog.org/clinical/clinical-guidance/practice-bulletin/ articles/2015/09/emergency-contraception
- State policies on emergency contraception. https://www.guttmacher.org/state-policy/explore/emergency-contraception
- State policies on minors’ access to contraceptive services. https://www.guttmacher.org/state-policy/explore/minors-access-contraceptive-services
- Patient-oriented contraceptive education materials (in English and Spanish). https://shop.powertodecide.org/ptd-category/educational-materials
Drug Brand Names
Carbamazepine • Tegretol
Levonorgestrel • Plan B One-Step, Fallback
Metformin • Glucophage
Naloxone • Narcan
Norethindrone • Aygestin
Sertraline • Zoloft
Topiramate • Topamax
Ulipristal acetate • Ella
Venlafaxine • Effexor
1. Grossman D. Expanding access to short-acting hormonal contraceptive methods in the United States. JAMA Intern Med. 2019;179:1209-1210.
2. Gur TL, Kim DR, Epperson CN. Central nervous system effects of prenatal selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors: sensing the signal through the noise. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2013;227:567-582.
3. Ross N, Landess J, Kaempf A, et al. Pregnancy termination: what psychiatrists need to know. Current Psychiatry. 2022;21:8-9.
4. Haeger KO, Lamme J, Cleland K. State of emergency contraception in the US, 2018. Contracept Reprod Med. 2018;3:20.
5. Curtis KM, Tepper NK, Jatlaoui TC, et al. US medical eligibility criteria for contraceptive use, 2016. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2016;65:1-3.
6. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Committee Opinion No 707: Access to emergency contraception. Obstet Gynecol. 2017;130:e48-e52.
7. Upadhya KK, Breuner CC, Alderman EM, et al. Emergency contraception. Pediatrics. 2019;144:e20193149.
8. Rowan A. Obama administration yields to the courts and the evidence, allows emergency contraception to be sold without restrictions. Guttmacher Institute. Published June 25, 2013. Accessed July 31, 2022. https://www.guttmacher.org/gpr/2013/06/obama-administration-yields-courts-and-evidence-allows-emergency-contraception-be-sold#
9. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Practice Bulletin No. 152: Emergency contraception. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;126:e1-e11.
10. Rodriguez MI, Curtis KM, Gaffield ML, et al. Advance supply of emergency contraception: a systematic review. Contraception. 2013;87:590-601.
11. World Health Organization. Emergency contraception. Published November 9, 2021. Accessed August 4, 2022. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/emergency-contraception
12. Shigesato M, Elia J, Tschann M, et al. Pharmacy access to ulipristal acetate in major cities throughout the United States. Contraception. 2018;97:264-269.
13. Wilkinson TA, Clark P, Rafie S, et al. Access to emergency contraception after removal of age restrictions. Pediatrics. 2017;140:e20164262.
14. Cleland K, Bass J, Doci F, et al. Access to emergency contraception in the over-the-counter era. Women’s Health Issues. 2016;26:622-627.
15. Glasier AF, Cameron ST, Fine PM, et al. Ulipristal acetate versus levonorgestrel for emergency contraception: a randomised non-inferiority trial and meta-analysis. Lancet. 2010;375:555-562.
16. McCloskey LR, Wisner KL, Cattan MK, et al. Contraception for women with psychiatric disorders. Am J Psychiatry. 2021;178:247-255.
17. Kapp N, Abitbol JL, Mathé H, et al. Effect of body weight and BMI on the efficacy of levonorgestrel emergency contraception. Contraception. 2015;91:97-104.
18. Festin MP, Peregoudov A, Seuc A, et al. Effect of BMI and body weight on pregnancy rates with LNG as emergency contraception: analysis of four WHO HRP studies. Contraception. 2017;95:50-54.
19. Edelman AB, Hennebold JD, Bond K, et al. Double dosing levonorgestrel-based emergency contraception for individuals with obesity: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2022;140(1):48-54.
20. FSRH Clinical Effectiveness Unit. FSRH clinical guideline: Emergency contraception. Published March 2017. Amended December 2020. Faculty of Sexual & Reproductive Healthcare. Accessed August 4, 2022. https://www.fsrh.org/documents/ceu-clinical-guidance-emergency-contraception-march-2017/
21. Guttmacher Institute. Minors’ access to contraceptive services. Guttmacher Institute. Accessed August 4, 2022. https://www.guttmacher.org/state-policy/explore/minors-access-contraceptive-services
22. Ross NE, Webster TG, Tastenhoye CA, et al. Reproductive decision-making capacity in women with psychiatric illness: a systematic review. J Acad Consult Liaison Psychiatry. 2022;63:61-70.
23. Friedman SH, Hall RCW. Avoiding malpractice while treating depression in pregnant women. Current Psychiatry. 2021;20:30-36.
24. Friedman SH. The ethics of treating depression in pregnancy. J Primary Healthcare. 2015;7:81-83.
Ms. A, age 22, is a college student who presents for an initial psychiatric evaluation. Her body mass index (BMI) is 20 (normal range: 18.5 to 24.9), and her medical history is positive only for childhood asthma. She has been treated for major depressive disorder with venlafaxine by her previous psychiatrist. While this antidepressant has been effective for some symptoms, she has experienced adverse effects and is interested in a different medication. During the evaluation, Ms. A remarks that she had a “scare” last night when the condom broke while having sex with her boyfriend. She says that she is interested in having children at some point, but not at present; she is concerned that getting pregnant now would cause her depression to “spiral out of control.”
Unwanted or mistimed pregnancies account for 45% of all pregnancies.1 While there are ramifications for any unintended pregnancy, the risks for patients with mental illness are greater and include potential adverse effects on the neonate from both psychiatric disease and psychiatric medication use, worse obstetrical outcomes for patients with untreated mental illness, and worsening of psychiatric symptoms and suicide risk in the peripartum period.2 These risks become even more pronounced when psychiatric medications are reflexively discontinued or reduced in pregnancy, which is commonly done contrary to best practice recommendations. In the United States, the recent Supreme Court decision in Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization has erased federal protections for abortion previously conferred by Roe v Wade. As a result, as of early October 2022, abortion had been made illegal in 11 states, and was likely to be banned in many others, most commonly in states where there is limited support for either parents or children. Thus, preventing unplanned pregnancies should be a treatment consideration for all medical disciplines.3
Psychiatrists may hesitate to prescribe emergency contraception (EC) due to fears it falls outside the scope of their practice. However, psychiatry has already moved towards prescribing nonpsychiatric medications when doing so clearly benefits the patient. One example is prescribing metformin to address metabolic syndrome related to the use of second-generation antipsychotics. Emergency contraceptives have strong safety profiles and are easy to prescribe. Unfortunately, there are many barriers to increasing access to emergency contraceptives for psychiatric patients.4 These include the erroneous belief that laboratory and physical exams are needed before starting EC, cost and/or limited stock of emergency contraceptives at pharmacies, and general confusion regarding what constitutes EC vs an oral abortive (Table 15-10). Psychiatrists are particularly well-positioned to support the reproductive autonomy and well-being of patients who struggle to engage with other clinicians. This article aims to help psychiatrists better understand EC so they can comfortably prescribe it before their patients need it.
What is emergency contraception?
EC is medications or devices that patients can use after sexual intercourse to prevent pregnancy. They do not impede the development of an established pregnancy and thus are not abortifacients. EC is not recommended as a primary means of contraception,9 but it can be extremely valuable to reduce pregnancy risk after unprotected intercourse or contraceptive failures such as broken condoms or missed doses of birth control pills. EC can prevent ≥95% of pregnancies when taken within 5 days of at-risk intercourse.11
Methods of EC fall into 2 categories: oral medications (sometimes referred to as “morning after pills”) and intrauterine devices (IUDs). IUDs are the most effective means of EC, especially for patients with higher BMIs or who may be taking medications such as cytochrome P450 (CYP)3A4 inducers that could interfere with the effectiveness of oral methods. IUDs also have the advantage of providing highly effective ongoing contraception.6 However, IUDs require in-office placement by a trained clinician, and patients may experience difficulty obtaining placement within 5 days of unprotected sex. Therefore, oral medication is the most common form of EC.
Oral EC is safe and effective, and professional societies (including the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists6 and the American Academy of Pediatrics7) recommend routinely prescribing oral EC for patients in advance of need. Advance prescribing eliminates barriers to accessing EC, increases the use of EC, and does not encourage risky sexual behaviors.10
Overview of oral emergency contraception
Two medications are FDA-approved for use as oral EC: ulipristal acetate and levonorgestrel. Both are available in generic and branded versions. While many common birth control pills can also be safely used off-label as emergency contraception (an approach known as the Yuzpe method), they are less effective, not as well-tolerated, and require knowledge of the specific type of pill the patient has available.9 Oral EC appears to work primarily through delay or inhibition of ovulation, and is unlikely to prevent implantation of a fertilized egg.9
Continue to: Ulipristal acetate
Ulipristal acetate (UPA) is an oral progesterone receptor agonist-antagonist taken as a single 30 mg dose up to 5 days after unprotected sex. Pregnancy rates from a single act of unprotected sex followed by UPA use range from 0% to 1.8%.4 Many pharmacies stock UPA, and others (especially chain pharmacies) report being able to order and fill it within 24 hours.12
Levonorgestrel (LNG) is an oral progestin that is available by prescription and has also been approved for over-the-counter sale to patients of all ages and sexes (without the need to show identification) since 2013.8 It is administered as a single 1.5 mg dose taken as soon as possible up to 3 days after unprotected sex, although it may continue to provide benefits when taken within 5 days. Pregnancy rates from a single act of unprotected sex followed by LNG use range from 0.3% to 2.6%, with much higher odds among women who are obese.4 LNG is available both by prescription or over-the-counter,13 although it is often kept in a locked cabinet or behind the counter, and staff are often misinformed regarding the lack of age restrictions for sale without a prescription.14
Safety and adverse effects. According to the CDC, there are no conditions for which the risks outweigh the advantages of use of either UPA or LNG,5 and patients for whom hormonal birth control is otherwise contraindicated can still use them safely. If a pregnancy has already occurred, taking EC will not harm the developing fetus; it is also safe to use when breastfeeding.5 Both medications are generally well-tolerated—neither has been causally linked to deaths or serious complications,5 and the most common adverse effects are headache (approximately 19%) and nausea (approximately 12%), in addition to irregular bleeding, fatigue, dizziness, and abdominal pain.15 Oral EC may be used more than once, even within the same menstrual cycle. Patients who use EC repeatedly should be encouraged to discuss more efficacious contraceptive options with their primary physician or gynecologist.
Will oral EC affect psychiatric treatment?
Oral EC is unlikely to have a meaningful effect on psychiatric symptoms or management, particularly when compared to the significant impacts of unintended pregnancies. Neither medication is known to have any clinically significant impacts on the pharmacokinetics or pharmacodynamics of psychotropic medications, although the effectiveness of both medications can be impaired by CYP3A4 inducers such as carbamazepine.5 In addition, while research has not specifically examined the impact of EC on psychiatric symptoms, the broader literature on hormonal contraception indicates that most patients with psychiatric disorders generally report similar or lower rates of mood symptoms associated with their use.16 Some women treated with hormonal contraceptives do develop dysphoric mood,16 but any such effects resulting from LNG would likely be transient. Mood disruptions or other psychiatric symptoms have not been associated with UPA use.
How to prescribe oral emergency contraception
Who and when. Women of reproductive age should be counseled about EC as part of anticipatory guidance, regardless of their current intentions for sexual behaviors. Patients do not need a physical examination or pregnancy test before being prescribed or using oral EC.9 Much like how intranasal naloxone is prescribed, prescriptions should be provided in advance of need, with multiple refills to facilitate ready access when needed.
Continue to: Which to prescribe
Which to prescribe. UPA is more effective in preventing pregnancy than LNG at all time points up to 120 hours after sex, including for women who are overweight or obese.15 As such, it is recommended as the first-line choice. However, because LNG is available without prescription and is more readily available (including via online order), it may be a good choice for patients who need rapid EC or who prefer a medication that does not require a prescription (Table 24,5,8,9,15).
What to tell patients. Patients should be instructed to fill their prescription before they expect to use it, to ensure ready availability when desired (Table 35,9). Oral EC is shelf stable for at least 3 years when stored in a cool, dry environment. Patients should take the medication as soon as possible following at-risk sexual intercourse (Table 4). Tell them that if they vomit within 3 hours of taking the medication, they should take a second dose. Remind patients that EC does not protect against sexually transmitted infections, or from sex that occurs after the medication is taken (in fact, they can increase the possibility of pregnancy later in that menstrual cycle due to delayed ovulation).9 Counsel patients to abstain from sex or to use barrier contraception for 7 days after use. Those who take birth control pills can resume use immediately after using LNG; they should wait 5 days after taking UPA.
No routine follow-up is needed after taking UPA or LNG. However, patients should get a pregnancy test if their period does not start within 3 weeks, and should seek medical evaluation if they experience significant lower abdominal pain or persistent irregular bleeding in order to rule out pregnancy-related complications. Patients who use EC repeatedly should be recommended to pursue routine contraceptive care.
Billing. Counseling your patients about contraception can increase the reimbursement you receive by adding to the complexity of the encounter (regardless of whether you prescribe a medication) through use of the ICD-10 code Z30.0.
Emergency contraception for special populations
Some patients face additional challenges to effective EC that should be considered when counseling and prescribing. Table 54,5,7,15,17-21 discusses the use of EC in these special populations. Of particular importance for psychiatrists, LNG is less effective at preventing undesired pregnancy among patients who are overweight or obese,15,17,18 and strong CYP3A4-inducing agents may decrease the effectiveness of both LNG and UPA.5 Keep in mind, however, that the advantages of using either UPA or LNG outweigh the risks for all populations.5 Patients must be aware of appropriate information in order to make informed decisions, but should not be discouraged from using EC.
Continue to: Other groups of patients...
Other groups of patients may face barriers due to some clinicians’ hesitancy regarding their ability to consent to reproductive care. Most patients with psychiatric illnesses have decision-making capacity regarding reproductive issues.22 Although EC is supported by the American Academy of Pediatrics,7 patients age <18 have varying rights to consent across states,21 and merit special consideration.
CASE CONTINUED
Ms. A does not wish to get pregnant at this time, and expresses fears that her recent contraceptive failure could lead to an unintended pregnancy. In addition to her psychiatric treatment, her psychiatrist should discuss EC options with her. She has a healthy BMI and had inadequately protected sex <1 day ago, so her clinician may prescribe LNG (to ensure rapid access for immediate use) in addition to UPA for her to have available in case of future “scares.” The psychiatrist should consider pharmacologic treatment with an antidepressant with a relatively safe reproductive record (eg, sertraline).23 This is considered preventive ethics, since Ms. A is of reproductive age, even if she is not presently planning to get pregnant, due to the aforementioned high rate of unplanned pregnancy.23,24 It is also important for the psychiatrist to continue the dialogue in future sessions about preventing unintended pregnancy. Since Ms. A has benefited from a psychotropic medication when not pregnant, it will be important to discuss with her the risks and benefits of medication should she plan a pregnancy.
Bottom Line
Patients with mental illnesses are at increased risk of adverse outcomes resulting from unintended pregnancies. Clinicians should counsel patients about emergency contraception (EC) as a part of routine psychiatric care, and should prescribe oral EC in advance of patient need to facilitate effective use.
Related Resources
- American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Practice Bulletin on Emergency Contraception. https://www.acog.org/clinical/clinical-guidance/practice-bulletin/ articles/2015/09/emergency-contraception
- State policies on emergency contraception. https://www.guttmacher.org/state-policy/explore/emergency-contraception
- State policies on minors’ access to contraceptive services. https://www.guttmacher.org/state-policy/explore/minors-access-contraceptive-services
- Patient-oriented contraceptive education materials (in English and Spanish). https://shop.powertodecide.org/ptd-category/educational-materials
Drug Brand Names
Carbamazepine • Tegretol
Levonorgestrel • Plan B One-Step, Fallback
Metformin • Glucophage
Naloxone • Narcan
Norethindrone • Aygestin
Sertraline • Zoloft
Topiramate • Topamax
Ulipristal acetate • Ella
Venlafaxine • Effexor
Ms. A, age 22, is a college student who presents for an initial psychiatric evaluation. Her body mass index (BMI) is 20 (normal range: 18.5 to 24.9), and her medical history is positive only for childhood asthma. She has been treated for major depressive disorder with venlafaxine by her previous psychiatrist. While this antidepressant has been effective for some symptoms, she has experienced adverse effects and is interested in a different medication. During the evaluation, Ms. A remarks that she had a “scare” last night when the condom broke while having sex with her boyfriend. She says that she is interested in having children at some point, but not at present; she is concerned that getting pregnant now would cause her depression to “spiral out of control.”
Unwanted or mistimed pregnancies account for 45% of all pregnancies.1 While there are ramifications for any unintended pregnancy, the risks for patients with mental illness are greater and include potential adverse effects on the neonate from both psychiatric disease and psychiatric medication use, worse obstetrical outcomes for patients with untreated mental illness, and worsening of psychiatric symptoms and suicide risk in the peripartum period.2 These risks become even more pronounced when psychiatric medications are reflexively discontinued or reduced in pregnancy, which is commonly done contrary to best practice recommendations. In the United States, the recent Supreme Court decision in Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization has erased federal protections for abortion previously conferred by Roe v Wade. As a result, as of early October 2022, abortion had been made illegal in 11 states, and was likely to be banned in many others, most commonly in states where there is limited support for either parents or children. Thus, preventing unplanned pregnancies should be a treatment consideration for all medical disciplines.3
Psychiatrists may hesitate to prescribe emergency contraception (EC) due to fears it falls outside the scope of their practice. However, psychiatry has already moved towards prescribing nonpsychiatric medications when doing so clearly benefits the patient. One example is prescribing metformin to address metabolic syndrome related to the use of second-generation antipsychotics. Emergency contraceptives have strong safety profiles and are easy to prescribe. Unfortunately, there are many barriers to increasing access to emergency contraceptives for psychiatric patients.4 These include the erroneous belief that laboratory and physical exams are needed before starting EC, cost and/or limited stock of emergency contraceptives at pharmacies, and general confusion regarding what constitutes EC vs an oral abortive (Table 15-10). Psychiatrists are particularly well-positioned to support the reproductive autonomy and well-being of patients who struggle to engage with other clinicians. This article aims to help psychiatrists better understand EC so they can comfortably prescribe it before their patients need it.
What is emergency contraception?
EC is medications or devices that patients can use after sexual intercourse to prevent pregnancy. They do not impede the development of an established pregnancy and thus are not abortifacients. EC is not recommended as a primary means of contraception,9 but it can be extremely valuable to reduce pregnancy risk after unprotected intercourse or contraceptive failures such as broken condoms or missed doses of birth control pills. EC can prevent ≥95% of pregnancies when taken within 5 days of at-risk intercourse.11
Methods of EC fall into 2 categories: oral medications (sometimes referred to as “morning after pills”) and intrauterine devices (IUDs). IUDs are the most effective means of EC, especially for patients with higher BMIs or who may be taking medications such as cytochrome P450 (CYP)3A4 inducers that could interfere with the effectiveness of oral methods. IUDs also have the advantage of providing highly effective ongoing contraception.6 However, IUDs require in-office placement by a trained clinician, and patients may experience difficulty obtaining placement within 5 days of unprotected sex. Therefore, oral medication is the most common form of EC.
Oral EC is safe and effective, and professional societies (including the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists6 and the American Academy of Pediatrics7) recommend routinely prescribing oral EC for patients in advance of need. Advance prescribing eliminates barriers to accessing EC, increases the use of EC, and does not encourage risky sexual behaviors.10
Overview of oral emergency contraception
Two medications are FDA-approved for use as oral EC: ulipristal acetate and levonorgestrel. Both are available in generic and branded versions. While many common birth control pills can also be safely used off-label as emergency contraception (an approach known as the Yuzpe method), they are less effective, not as well-tolerated, and require knowledge of the specific type of pill the patient has available.9 Oral EC appears to work primarily through delay or inhibition of ovulation, and is unlikely to prevent implantation of a fertilized egg.9
Continue to: Ulipristal acetate
Ulipristal acetate (UPA) is an oral progesterone receptor agonist-antagonist taken as a single 30 mg dose up to 5 days after unprotected sex. Pregnancy rates from a single act of unprotected sex followed by UPA use range from 0% to 1.8%.4 Many pharmacies stock UPA, and others (especially chain pharmacies) report being able to order and fill it within 24 hours.12
Levonorgestrel (LNG) is an oral progestin that is available by prescription and has also been approved for over-the-counter sale to patients of all ages and sexes (without the need to show identification) since 2013.8 It is administered as a single 1.5 mg dose taken as soon as possible up to 3 days after unprotected sex, although it may continue to provide benefits when taken within 5 days. Pregnancy rates from a single act of unprotected sex followed by LNG use range from 0.3% to 2.6%, with much higher odds among women who are obese.4 LNG is available both by prescription or over-the-counter,13 although it is often kept in a locked cabinet or behind the counter, and staff are often misinformed regarding the lack of age restrictions for sale without a prescription.14
Safety and adverse effects. According to the CDC, there are no conditions for which the risks outweigh the advantages of use of either UPA or LNG,5 and patients for whom hormonal birth control is otherwise contraindicated can still use them safely. If a pregnancy has already occurred, taking EC will not harm the developing fetus; it is also safe to use when breastfeeding.5 Both medications are generally well-tolerated—neither has been causally linked to deaths or serious complications,5 and the most common adverse effects are headache (approximately 19%) and nausea (approximately 12%), in addition to irregular bleeding, fatigue, dizziness, and abdominal pain.15 Oral EC may be used more than once, even within the same menstrual cycle. Patients who use EC repeatedly should be encouraged to discuss more efficacious contraceptive options with their primary physician or gynecologist.
Will oral EC affect psychiatric treatment?
Oral EC is unlikely to have a meaningful effect on psychiatric symptoms or management, particularly when compared to the significant impacts of unintended pregnancies. Neither medication is known to have any clinically significant impacts on the pharmacokinetics or pharmacodynamics of psychotropic medications, although the effectiveness of both medications can be impaired by CYP3A4 inducers such as carbamazepine.5 In addition, while research has not specifically examined the impact of EC on psychiatric symptoms, the broader literature on hormonal contraception indicates that most patients with psychiatric disorders generally report similar or lower rates of mood symptoms associated with their use.16 Some women treated with hormonal contraceptives do develop dysphoric mood,16 but any such effects resulting from LNG would likely be transient. Mood disruptions or other psychiatric symptoms have not been associated with UPA use.
How to prescribe oral emergency contraception
Who and when. Women of reproductive age should be counseled about EC as part of anticipatory guidance, regardless of their current intentions for sexual behaviors. Patients do not need a physical examination or pregnancy test before being prescribed or using oral EC.9 Much like how intranasal naloxone is prescribed, prescriptions should be provided in advance of need, with multiple refills to facilitate ready access when needed.
Continue to: Which to prescribe
Which to prescribe. UPA is more effective in preventing pregnancy than LNG at all time points up to 120 hours after sex, including for women who are overweight or obese.15 As such, it is recommended as the first-line choice. However, because LNG is available without prescription and is more readily available (including via online order), it may be a good choice for patients who need rapid EC or who prefer a medication that does not require a prescription (Table 24,5,8,9,15).
What to tell patients. Patients should be instructed to fill their prescription before they expect to use it, to ensure ready availability when desired (Table 35,9). Oral EC is shelf stable for at least 3 years when stored in a cool, dry environment. Patients should take the medication as soon as possible following at-risk sexual intercourse (Table 4). Tell them that if they vomit within 3 hours of taking the medication, they should take a second dose. Remind patients that EC does not protect against sexually transmitted infections, or from sex that occurs after the medication is taken (in fact, they can increase the possibility of pregnancy later in that menstrual cycle due to delayed ovulation).9 Counsel patients to abstain from sex or to use barrier contraception for 7 days after use. Those who take birth control pills can resume use immediately after using LNG; they should wait 5 days after taking UPA.
No routine follow-up is needed after taking UPA or LNG. However, patients should get a pregnancy test if their period does not start within 3 weeks, and should seek medical evaluation if they experience significant lower abdominal pain or persistent irregular bleeding in order to rule out pregnancy-related complications. Patients who use EC repeatedly should be recommended to pursue routine contraceptive care.
Billing. Counseling your patients about contraception can increase the reimbursement you receive by adding to the complexity of the encounter (regardless of whether you prescribe a medication) through use of the ICD-10 code Z30.0.
Emergency contraception for special populations
Some patients face additional challenges to effective EC that should be considered when counseling and prescribing. Table 54,5,7,15,17-21 discusses the use of EC in these special populations. Of particular importance for psychiatrists, LNG is less effective at preventing undesired pregnancy among patients who are overweight or obese,15,17,18 and strong CYP3A4-inducing agents may decrease the effectiveness of both LNG and UPA.5 Keep in mind, however, that the advantages of using either UPA or LNG outweigh the risks for all populations.5 Patients must be aware of appropriate information in order to make informed decisions, but should not be discouraged from using EC.
Continue to: Other groups of patients...
Other groups of patients may face barriers due to some clinicians’ hesitancy regarding their ability to consent to reproductive care. Most patients with psychiatric illnesses have decision-making capacity regarding reproductive issues.22 Although EC is supported by the American Academy of Pediatrics,7 patients age <18 have varying rights to consent across states,21 and merit special consideration.
CASE CONTINUED
Ms. A does not wish to get pregnant at this time, and expresses fears that her recent contraceptive failure could lead to an unintended pregnancy. In addition to her psychiatric treatment, her psychiatrist should discuss EC options with her. She has a healthy BMI and had inadequately protected sex <1 day ago, so her clinician may prescribe LNG (to ensure rapid access for immediate use) in addition to UPA for her to have available in case of future “scares.” The psychiatrist should consider pharmacologic treatment with an antidepressant with a relatively safe reproductive record (eg, sertraline).23 This is considered preventive ethics, since Ms. A is of reproductive age, even if she is not presently planning to get pregnant, due to the aforementioned high rate of unplanned pregnancy.23,24 It is also important for the psychiatrist to continue the dialogue in future sessions about preventing unintended pregnancy. Since Ms. A has benefited from a psychotropic medication when not pregnant, it will be important to discuss with her the risks and benefits of medication should she plan a pregnancy.
Bottom Line
Patients with mental illnesses are at increased risk of adverse outcomes resulting from unintended pregnancies. Clinicians should counsel patients about emergency contraception (EC) as a part of routine psychiatric care, and should prescribe oral EC in advance of patient need to facilitate effective use.
Related Resources
- American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Practice Bulletin on Emergency Contraception. https://www.acog.org/clinical/clinical-guidance/practice-bulletin/ articles/2015/09/emergency-contraception
- State policies on emergency contraception. https://www.guttmacher.org/state-policy/explore/emergency-contraception
- State policies on minors’ access to contraceptive services. https://www.guttmacher.org/state-policy/explore/minors-access-contraceptive-services
- Patient-oriented contraceptive education materials (in English and Spanish). https://shop.powertodecide.org/ptd-category/educational-materials
Drug Brand Names
Carbamazepine • Tegretol
Levonorgestrel • Plan B One-Step, Fallback
Metformin • Glucophage
Naloxone • Narcan
Norethindrone • Aygestin
Sertraline • Zoloft
Topiramate • Topamax
Ulipristal acetate • Ella
Venlafaxine • Effexor
1. Grossman D. Expanding access to short-acting hormonal contraceptive methods in the United States. JAMA Intern Med. 2019;179:1209-1210.
2. Gur TL, Kim DR, Epperson CN. Central nervous system effects of prenatal selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors: sensing the signal through the noise. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2013;227:567-582.
3. Ross N, Landess J, Kaempf A, et al. Pregnancy termination: what psychiatrists need to know. Current Psychiatry. 2022;21:8-9.
4. Haeger KO, Lamme J, Cleland K. State of emergency contraception in the US, 2018. Contracept Reprod Med. 2018;3:20.
5. Curtis KM, Tepper NK, Jatlaoui TC, et al. US medical eligibility criteria for contraceptive use, 2016. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2016;65:1-3.
6. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Committee Opinion No 707: Access to emergency contraception. Obstet Gynecol. 2017;130:e48-e52.
7. Upadhya KK, Breuner CC, Alderman EM, et al. Emergency contraception. Pediatrics. 2019;144:e20193149.
8. Rowan A. Obama administration yields to the courts and the evidence, allows emergency contraception to be sold without restrictions. Guttmacher Institute. Published June 25, 2013. Accessed July 31, 2022. https://www.guttmacher.org/gpr/2013/06/obama-administration-yields-courts-and-evidence-allows-emergency-contraception-be-sold#
9. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Practice Bulletin No. 152: Emergency contraception. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;126:e1-e11.
10. Rodriguez MI, Curtis KM, Gaffield ML, et al. Advance supply of emergency contraception: a systematic review. Contraception. 2013;87:590-601.
11. World Health Organization. Emergency contraception. Published November 9, 2021. Accessed August 4, 2022. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/emergency-contraception
12. Shigesato M, Elia J, Tschann M, et al. Pharmacy access to ulipristal acetate in major cities throughout the United States. Contraception. 2018;97:264-269.
13. Wilkinson TA, Clark P, Rafie S, et al. Access to emergency contraception after removal of age restrictions. Pediatrics. 2017;140:e20164262.
14. Cleland K, Bass J, Doci F, et al. Access to emergency contraception in the over-the-counter era. Women’s Health Issues. 2016;26:622-627.
15. Glasier AF, Cameron ST, Fine PM, et al. Ulipristal acetate versus levonorgestrel for emergency contraception: a randomised non-inferiority trial and meta-analysis. Lancet. 2010;375:555-562.
16. McCloskey LR, Wisner KL, Cattan MK, et al. Contraception for women with psychiatric disorders. Am J Psychiatry. 2021;178:247-255.
17. Kapp N, Abitbol JL, Mathé H, et al. Effect of body weight and BMI on the efficacy of levonorgestrel emergency contraception. Contraception. 2015;91:97-104.
18. Festin MP, Peregoudov A, Seuc A, et al. Effect of BMI and body weight on pregnancy rates with LNG as emergency contraception: analysis of four WHO HRP studies. Contraception. 2017;95:50-54.
19. Edelman AB, Hennebold JD, Bond K, et al. Double dosing levonorgestrel-based emergency contraception for individuals with obesity: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2022;140(1):48-54.
20. FSRH Clinical Effectiveness Unit. FSRH clinical guideline: Emergency contraception. Published March 2017. Amended December 2020. Faculty of Sexual & Reproductive Healthcare. Accessed August 4, 2022. https://www.fsrh.org/documents/ceu-clinical-guidance-emergency-contraception-march-2017/
21. Guttmacher Institute. Minors’ access to contraceptive services. Guttmacher Institute. Accessed August 4, 2022. https://www.guttmacher.org/state-policy/explore/minors-access-contraceptive-services
22. Ross NE, Webster TG, Tastenhoye CA, et al. Reproductive decision-making capacity in women with psychiatric illness: a systematic review. J Acad Consult Liaison Psychiatry. 2022;63:61-70.
23. Friedman SH, Hall RCW. Avoiding malpractice while treating depression in pregnant women. Current Psychiatry. 2021;20:30-36.
24. Friedman SH. The ethics of treating depression in pregnancy. J Primary Healthcare. 2015;7:81-83.
1. Grossman D. Expanding access to short-acting hormonal contraceptive methods in the United States. JAMA Intern Med. 2019;179:1209-1210.
2. Gur TL, Kim DR, Epperson CN. Central nervous system effects of prenatal selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors: sensing the signal through the noise. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2013;227:567-582.
3. Ross N, Landess J, Kaempf A, et al. Pregnancy termination: what psychiatrists need to know. Current Psychiatry. 2022;21:8-9.
4. Haeger KO, Lamme J, Cleland K. State of emergency contraception in the US, 2018. Contracept Reprod Med. 2018;3:20.
5. Curtis KM, Tepper NK, Jatlaoui TC, et al. US medical eligibility criteria for contraceptive use, 2016. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2016;65:1-3.
6. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Committee Opinion No 707: Access to emergency contraception. Obstet Gynecol. 2017;130:e48-e52.
7. Upadhya KK, Breuner CC, Alderman EM, et al. Emergency contraception. Pediatrics. 2019;144:e20193149.
8. Rowan A. Obama administration yields to the courts and the evidence, allows emergency contraception to be sold without restrictions. Guttmacher Institute. Published June 25, 2013. Accessed July 31, 2022. https://www.guttmacher.org/gpr/2013/06/obama-administration-yields-courts-and-evidence-allows-emergency-contraception-be-sold#
9. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Practice Bulletin No. 152: Emergency contraception. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;126:e1-e11.
10. Rodriguez MI, Curtis KM, Gaffield ML, et al. Advance supply of emergency contraception: a systematic review. Contraception. 2013;87:590-601.
11. World Health Organization. Emergency contraception. Published November 9, 2021. Accessed August 4, 2022. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/emergency-contraception
12. Shigesato M, Elia J, Tschann M, et al. Pharmacy access to ulipristal acetate in major cities throughout the United States. Contraception. 2018;97:264-269.
13. Wilkinson TA, Clark P, Rafie S, et al. Access to emergency contraception after removal of age restrictions. Pediatrics. 2017;140:e20164262.
14. Cleland K, Bass J, Doci F, et al. Access to emergency contraception in the over-the-counter era. Women’s Health Issues. 2016;26:622-627.
15. Glasier AF, Cameron ST, Fine PM, et al. Ulipristal acetate versus levonorgestrel for emergency contraception: a randomised non-inferiority trial and meta-analysis. Lancet. 2010;375:555-562.
16. McCloskey LR, Wisner KL, Cattan MK, et al. Contraception for women with psychiatric disorders. Am J Psychiatry. 2021;178:247-255.
17. Kapp N, Abitbol JL, Mathé H, et al. Effect of body weight and BMI on the efficacy of levonorgestrel emergency contraception. Contraception. 2015;91:97-104.
18. Festin MP, Peregoudov A, Seuc A, et al. Effect of BMI and body weight on pregnancy rates with LNG as emergency contraception: analysis of four WHO HRP studies. Contraception. 2017;95:50-54.
19. Edelman AB, Hennebold JD, Bond K, et al. Double dosing levonorgestrel-based emergency contraception for individuals with obesity: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2022;140(1):48-54.
20. FSRH Clinical Effectiveness Unit. FSRH clinical guideline: Emergency contraception. Published March 2017. Amended December 2020. Faculty of Sexual & Reproductive Healthcare. Accessed August 4, 2022. https://www.fsrh.org/documents/ceu-clinical-guidance-emergency-contraception-march-2017/
21. Guttmacher Institute. Minors’ access to contraceptive services. Guttmacher Institute. Accessed August 4, 2022. https://www.guttmacher.org/state-policy/explore/minors-access-contraceptive-services
22. Ross NE, Webster TG, Tastenhoye CA, et al. Reproductive decision-making capacity in women with psychiatric illness: a systematic review. J Acad Consult Liaison Psychiatry. 2022;63:61-70.
23. Friedman SH, Hall RCW. Avoiding malpractice while treating depression in pregnant women. Current Psychiatry. 2021;20:30-36.
24. Friedman SH. The ethics of treating depression in pregnancy. J Primary Healthcare. 2015;7:81-83.
A heartwarming welcome
Dear colleagues,
This November issue of The New Gastroenterologist marks my official transition as the new Editor in Chief! I am humbled with this opportunity to be a part of such a unique publication and have received immense support from Dr. Vijaya Rao, the TNG staff, as well as my mentors and colleagues. With its foundation built by Dr. Bryson Katona and then taken to the next level by Dr. Rao, TNG has grown over the years, and I hope that I can continue to extend its reach to more trainees and early faculty.
In this issue’s In Focus, Dr. Wenfei Wang and Dr. Neil Sengupta (both from University of Chicago) review the management of antithrombotic medications in elective endoscopic procedures and emphasize individualizing the approach while providing guideline recommendations on how to navigate the gastrointestinal bleeding risk and cardiovascular disease in this day and age.
With endoscopic bariatric therapy and antiobesity medications burgeoning within gastroenterology, Dr. Singrid Young (New York University), Dr. Cameron Zenger (New York University), Dr. Erik Holzwanger (Harvard Medical School in Boston), and Dr. Violeta Popov (New York University) review how their multidisciplinary approach has made their endoscopic bariatric program successful in treating patients struggling with obesity. In our Ethics section, Dr. David Ney (Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia) and Dr. Jason Karlawish (University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia) delve into patient capacity, particularly when consenting for procedures.
Being involved with national society committees may seem daunting to a lot of trainees and early faculty, but Dr. Peter S. Liang (New York University Langone Health) and Dr. Stephanie D. Pointer (Tristar Hendersonville Medical Center in Tennessee) describe their journeys to becoming AGA committee chairs as early-career physicians. While you ponder whether to join a committee, it may be a good time to learn new ways to increase your financial portfolio through passive income, detailed by Dr. Latifat Alli-Akintade (Kaiser Permanente South Sacramento Medical Center in California).
Last but not least, I am excited to introduce a personal favorite in this newsletter – a piece on females supporting female gastroenterologists in career development and more. Dr. Tonya Adams outlines action items on how to create a culture that fosters professional and leadership development among females, using the Gastro Health Women’s Network as an example of how this network has succeeded in cultivating such an environment.
If you are interested in contributing or have ideas for future TNG topics, please contact me (jtrieu23@gmail.com), or Jillian Schweitzer (jschweitzer@gastro.org), managing editor of TNG.
Until next time, I leave you with an interesting historical fact: William Beaumont, the father of Gastroenterology, published the first findings on the digestive system after performing experiments on Alexis St. Martin when he developed a large gastrocutaneous fistula from an abdominal gunshot wound.
Yours truly,
Judy A. Trieu, MD, MPH
Editor in Chief
Advanced Endoscopy Fellow, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Division of Gastroenterology & Hepatology
Dear colleagues,
This November issue of The New Gastroenterologist marks my official transition as the new Editor in Chief! I am humbled with this opportunity to be a part of such a unique publication and have received immense support from Dr. Vijaya Rao, the TNG staff, as well as my mentors and colleagues. With its foundation built by Dr. Bryson Katona and then taken to the next level by Dr. Rao, TNG has grown over the years, and I hope that I can continue to extend its reach to more trainees and early faculty.
In this issue’s In Focus, Dr. Wenfei Wang and Dr. Neil Sengupta (both from University of Chicago) review the management of antithrombotic medications in elective endoscopic procedures and emphasize individualizing the approach while providing guideline recommendations on how to navigate the gastrointestinal bleeding risk and cardiovascular disease in this day and age.
With endoscopic bariatric therapy and antiobesity medications burgeoning within gastroenterology, Dr. Singrid Young (New York University), Dr. Cameron Zenger (New York University), Dr. Erik Holzwanger (Harvard Medical School in Boston), and Dr. Violeta Popov (New York University) review how their multidisciplinary approach has made their endoscopic bariatric program successful in treating patients struggling with obesity. In our Ethics section, Dr. David Ney (Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia) and Dr. Jason Karlawish (University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia) delve into patient capacity, particularly when consenting for procedures.
Being involved with national society committees may seem daunting to a lot of trainees and early faculty, but Dr. Peter S. Liang (New York University Langone Health) and Dr. Stephanie D. Pointer (Tristar Hendersonville Medical Center in Tennessee) describe their journeys to becoming AGA committee chairs as early-career physicians. While you ponder whether to join a committee, it may be a good time to learn new ways to increase your financial portfolio through passive income, detailed by Dr. Latifat Alli-Akintade (Kaiser Permanente South Sacramento Medical Center in California).
Last but not least, I am excited to introduce a personal favorite in this newsletter – a piece on females supporting female gastroenterologists in career development and more. Dr. Tonya Adams outlines action items on how to create a culture that fosters professional and leadership development among females, using the Gastro Health Women’s Network as an example of how this network has succeeded in cultivating such an environment.
If you are interested in contributing or have ideas for future TNG topics, please contact me (jtrieu23@gmail.com), or Jillian Schweitzer (jschweitzer@gastro.org), managing editor of TNG.
Until next time, I leave you with an interesting historical fact: William Beaumont, the father of Gastroenterology, published the first findings on the digestive system after performing experiments on Alexis St. Martin when he developed a large gastrocutaneous fistula from an abdominal gunshot wound.
Yours truly,
Judy A. Trieu, MD, MPH
Editor in Chief
Advanced Endoscopy Fellow, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Division of Gastroenterology & Hepatology
Dear colleagues,
This November issue of The New Gastroenterologist marks my official transition as the new Editor in Chief! I am humbled with this opportunity to be a part of such a unique publication and have received immense support from Dr. Vijaya Rao, the TNG staff, as well as my mentors and colleagues. With its foundation built by Dr. Bryson Katona and then taken to the next level by Dr. Rao, TNG has grown over the years, and I hope that I can continue to extend its reach to more trainees and early faculty.
In this issue’s In Focus, Dr. Wenfei Wang and Dr. Neil Sengupta (both from University of Chicago) review the management of antithrombotic medications in elective endoscopic procedures and emphasize individualizing the approach while providing guideline recommendations on how to navigate the gastrointestinal bleeding risk and cardiovascular disease in this day and age.
With endoscopic bariatric therapy and antiobesity medications burgeoning within gastroenterology, Dr. Singrid Young (New York University), Dr. Cameron Zenger (New York University), Dr. Erik Holzwanger (Harvard Medical School in Boston), and Dr. Violeta Popov (New York University) review how their multidisciplinary approach has made their endoscopic bariatric program successful in treating patients struggling with obesity. In our Ethics section, Dr. David Ney (Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia) and Dr. Jason Karlawish (University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia) delve into patient capacity, particularly when consenting for procedures.
Being involved with national society committees may seem daunting to a lot of trainees and early faculty, but Dr. Peter S. Liang (New York University Langone Health) and Dr. Stephanie D. Pointer (Tristar Hendersonville Medical Center in Tennessee) describe their journeys to becoming AGA committee chairs as early-career physicians. While you ponder whether to join a committee, it may be a good time to learn new ways to increase your financial portfolio through passive income, detailed by Dr. Latifat Alli-Akintade (Kaiser Permanente South Sacramento Medical Center in California).
Last but not least, I am excited to introduce a personal favorite in this newsletter – a piece on females supporting female gastroenterologists in career development and more. Dr. Tonya Adams outlines action items on how to create a culture that fosters professional and leadership development among females, using the Gastro Health Women’s Network as an example of how this network has succeeded in cultivating such an environment.
If you are interested in contributing or have ideas for future TNG topics, please contact me (jtrieu23@gmail.com), or Jillian Schweitzer (jschweitzer@gastro.org), managing editor of TNG.
Until next time, I leave you with an interesting historical fact: William Beaumont, the father of Gastroenterology, published the first findings on the digestive system after performing experiments on Alexis St. Martin when he developed a large gastrocutaneous fistula from an abdominal gunshot wound.
Yours truly,
Judy A. Trieu, MD, MPH
Editor in Chief
Advanced Endoscopy Fellow, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Division of Gastroenterology & Hepatology