Abnormal Uterine Bleeding Associated With Hormonal Contraception.

Abnormal uterine bleeding is a common and bothersome symptom in people using hormonal contraception, and it can lead to discontinuation of reliable methods of contraception and unintended pregnancies. Clinicians should counsel individuals about the potential for abnormal bleeding at initiation of the contraceptive method. After considering and excluding other potential causes of abnormal uterine bleeding, clinicians can offer treatment options specific to each hormonal contraceptive method. This article includes algorithms to help clinicians treat abnormal uterine bleeding in people using levonorgestrel intrauterine devices, depo-medroxyprogesterone acetate, progestin implant, progestin-only pills, and combined hormonal contraception. For patients with levonorgestrel intrauterine devices, physicians should first ensure that the device is correctly placed within the uterus, then consider nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs as a first-line treatment for abnormal uterine bleeding; estradiol can be used if nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are ineffective. For depo-medroxyprogesterone acetate or progestin implant users, combined oral contraceptives or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs may be considered. For patients using norethindrone progestin-only pills, changing to drospirenone progesterone-only pills may help reduce the bleeding. In people using combined hormonal contraception, it may be helpful to increase estrogen content from 20 mcg to 35 mcg per day, decrease the hormone-free interval (from seven to four or five days) in people using cyclic contraception, or start a trial of low-dose doxycycline. For continuous combined contraception users, adding a hormone-free interval of four or five days can help regulate bleeding patterns.

Three Thirty-Two AM: My Last Call.

In this essay, I describe my last overnight call as I transitioned out of practicing obstetrics. I was worried that by giving up doing inpatient medicine and practicing obstetrics, I would lose my identity as a family physician. I realized that I can embody the core values of a family physician, including generalism and patient centeredness, in the office as well as in the hospital. Family physicians can stay true to their historical values even while giving up inpatient medicine and obstetric care by remembering that it is not only what we do, but how we do it that is important.

Adenomyosis: Diagnosis and Management.

Adenomyosis is a clinical condition where endometrial glands are found in the myometrium of the uterus. One in three patients with adenomyosis is asymptomatic, but the rest may present with heavy menstrual bleeding, pelvic pain, or infertility. Heavy menstrual bleeding is the most common symptom. Adenomyosis is distinct from endometriosis (the presence of endometrial glands outside of the uterus), but the two conditions often occur simultaneously. Risk factors for developing adenomyosis include increasing age, parity, and history of uterine procedures. Most patients are diagnosed from 40 to 50 years of age, but younger patients with infertility are increasingly being diagnosed with adenomyosis as imaging modalities improve. Diagnosis of adenomyosis begins with clinical suspicion and is confirmed with transvaginal ultrasonography and pelvic magnetic resonance imaging. Treatment of adenomyosis typically starts with hormonal menstrual suppression. Levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine systems have shown some effectiveness. Patients with adenomyosis may ultimately have a hysterectomy if symptoms are not controlled with medical therapy.

Breast Implants: Common Questions and Answers.

Breast implants are used for a wide range of cosmetic and reconstructive purposes. In addition to breast augmentation, implants can be used for postmastectomy breast reconstruction, correction of congenital breast anomalies, breast or chest wall deformities, and male-to-female top surgery. Breast implants may confer significant benefits to patients, but several factors are important to consider preoperatively, including the impact on mammography, future lactation, and potential long-term implant complications (e.g., infection, capsular contracture, rupture, and the need for revision, replacement, or removal). A fundamental understanding of implant monitoring is also paramount to implant use. Patients with silicone breast implants should undergo routine screening for implant rupture with magnetic resonance imaging or ultrasonography completed five to six years postoperatively and then every two to three years thereafter. With the exception of complications, there are no formal recommendations regarding the timing of breast implant removal or exchange. Women with unilateral breast swelling should be evaluated with ultrasonography for an effusion that might indicate breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma. There are no specific breast cancer screening recommendations for patients with breast implants, but special mammographic views are indicated to enhance accuracy. Although these discussions are a routine component of consultation and postoperative follow-up for plastic surgeons performing these procedures, family physicians should have a working knowledge of implant indications, characteristics, and complications to better counsel their patients, to ensure appropriate screening, and to coordinate care after surgery.

Core Elements of Shared Decision-making for Women Considering Breast Cancer Screening: Results of a Modified Delphi Survey.

BACKGROUND: The United States Preventive Services Task Force recommends individualized breast cancer screening for average-risk women before age 50, advised by risk assessment and shared decision-making (SDM). However, the foundational principles of this recommendation that would inform decision support tools for patients and primary care physicians at the point of care have not been codified. Determining the core elements of SDM for breast cancer screening as valued by patients and primary care providers (PCPs) is necessary for implementing effective SDM tools. The aim of this study is to affirm core elements of SDM in the context of clinical interactions, through a Delphi consensus process. METHODS: A Delphi was conducted with 30 participants (10 women aged 40-49, 10 PCPs, and 10 healthcare decision scientists), to codify core elements of breast cancer screening SDM. The criterion for establishing consensus was a threshold of 80% agreement. The Delphi concluded with an 83% response rate. RESULTS: Of 48 items fielded, 44 met the threshold on the high-importance end of the response scale and were accepted as core elements. Core elements across three thematic categories-information delivery and patient education, interpersonal clinician-patient communication, and framework of the decision-received panelists' support in nearly equal measure. Panelists unanimously agreed that SDM should include provision of clearly understandable information, including that of personal breast cancer risk factors, and benefits and harms of mammography screening, and that PCPs should convey they are listening, knowledgeable, and demonstrate cultural sensitivity. DISCUSSION: This research codifies the core elements of SDM for mammography in women 40-49, augmenting the evidence to inform discussions between patients and physicians. These core elements of SDM have the potential to operationalize SDM for breast cancer screening in an effort to improve public health outcomes.

BRCA Mutation Carriers: Breast and Ovarian Cancer Screening Guidelines and Imaging Considerations.

Patients who carry the BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutations have an underlying genetic predisposition for breast and ovarian cancers. These deleterious genetic mutations are the most common genes implicated in hereditary breast and ovarian cancers. This monograph summarizes the evidence behind current screening recommendations, reviews imaging protocols specific to this patient population, and illustrates some of the imaging nuances of breast and ovarian cancers in this clinical setting.

Age-based versus Risk-based Mammography Screening in Women 40-49 Years Old: A Cross-sectional Study.

Background Risk-based screening in women 40-49 years old has not been evaluated in routine screening mammography practice. Purpose To use a cross-sectional study design to compare the trade-offs of risk-based and age-based screening for women 45 years of age or older to determine short-term outcomes. Materials and Methods A retrospective cross-sectional study was performed by using a database of 20 539 prospectively interpreted consecutive digital screening mammograms in 10 280 average-risk women aged 40-49 years who were screened at an academic medical center between January 1, 2006, and December 31, 2013. Two hypothetical screening scenarios were compared: an age-based (≥45 years) scenario versus a risk-based (a 5-year risk of breast cancer greater than that of an average 50-year-old) scenario. Risk factors for risk-based screening included family history, race, age, prior breast biopsy, and breast density. Outcomes included breast cancers detected at mammography, false-positive mammograms, and benign biopsy findings. Short-term outcomes were compared by using the χ2 test. Results The screening population included 71 148 screening mammograms in 24 928 women with a mean age of 55.5 years ± 8.9 (standard deviation) (age range, 40-74 years). In women 40-49 years old, usual care included 50 screening-detected cancers, 1787 false-positive mammograms, and 384 benign biopsy results. The age-based (≥45 years) screening strategy revealed more cancers than did the risk-based strategy (34 [68%] vs 13 [26%] of 50; P < .001), while prompting more false-positive mammograms (899 [50.3%] vs 216 [12.1%] of 1787; P < .001) and benign biopsy results (175 [45.6%] vs 49 [12.8%] of 384; P < .001). The risk-based strategy demonstrated low levels of eligibility (few screenings) in the 40-44-year age group. Differences in outcomes in the 45-49-year age group explained the overall hypothetical screening strategy differences. Conclusion Risk-based screening for women 40-49 years old includes few women in the 40-44-year age range. Significant trade-offs in the 45-49-year age group explain the overall difference between hypothetical screening scenarios, both of which reduce the benefits as well as the harms of mammography for women 40-49 years old. © RSNA, 2019 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Joe and Hayward in this issue.

Key Elements of Mammography Shared Decision-Making: a Scoping Review of the Literature.

BACKGROUND: New guidelines recommend shared decision-making (SDM) for women and their clinician in consideration of breast cancer screening, particularly for women ages 35-50 where guidelines for routine mammography are controversial. A number of models offer general guidelines for SDM across clinical practice, yet they do not offer specific guidance about conducting SDM in mammography. We conducted a scoping review of the literature to identify the key elements of breast cancer screening SDM and synthesize these key elements for utilization by primary care clinicians. METHODS: The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews; Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL Plus); PsycInfo, PubMed (MEDLINE), Scopus, and SocIndex databases were searched. Inclusion criteria were original studies from peer-reviewed publications (from 2009 or later) reporting breast cancer screening (mammography), medical decision-making, and patient-centered care. Study populations needed to include female patients 18+ years of age facing a real-life breast cancer screening decision. Article findings were specific to shared decision-making and/or use of a decision aid. Data extracted includes study design, population, setting, intervention, and critical findings related to breast cancer screening SDM elements. Scoping analysis includes descriptive analysis of study features and content analysis to identify the SDM key elements. RESULTS: Twenty-four articles were retained. Three thematic categories of key elements emerged from the extracted elements: information delivery/patient education (specific content and delivery modes), interpersonal clinician-patient communication (aspects of interpersonal relationship impacting SDM), and framework of the decision (sociocultural factors beyond direct SDM deliberation). A number of specific breast cancer screening SDM elements relevant to primary care clinical practice are delineated. DISCUSSION: The findings underscore the importance of the relationship between the patient and clinician and the necessity of spelling out each step in the SDM process. The clinician needs to be explicit in telling a woman that she has a choice about whether to get a mammogram and the benefits and harms of screening mammography. Finally, clinicians need to be aware of sociocultural factors that can influence their relationships and their patients' decision-making processes and attempt to identify and address these factors.

A Review of Long-Acting Reversible Contraception Methods and Barriers to Their Use.

Unplanned pregnancies are a serious health concern in Wisconsin. Increasing access to contraception is a proven method to reduce unplanned pregnancies while giving patients greater agency. Long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) methods, such as subdermal implants and intrauterine devices (IUD), are among the most effective contraception methods available and have high patient satisfaction. However, relatively few Wisconsin patients use these methods. Lack of provider skill in inserting and counseling about LARCs, inability to perform same-day LARC insertion, and absent hospital protocols for immediate postpartum insertion represent barriers to LARC access. Centralized efforts are required to remove these barriers so that all patients in Wisconsin can access highly effective contraception.

Mammography Screening: Gaps in Patient's and Physician's Needs for Shared Decision-Making.

As shared decision-making increasingly influences screening mammography, understanding similarities and differences between patients and physician perspectives becomes crucially important. This study compares women's and physicians' experiences of mammography shared decision-making. Results reflect the critical gaps which exist between women's expectations and physicians' confidence in shared decision-making regarding screening mammography.

A Brief Clinical Update on Hepatitis C--The Essentials.

Infection with the hepatitis C virus (HCV) is a common cause of cirrhosis and liver failure and the most common indication for liver transplant in the United States. Based on the prevalence of HCV infection at 1.3% of the US population, there are an estimated 74,000 people living with HCV infection in the state of Wisconsin, the majority of whom are undiagnosed. HCV infections in Wisconsin have increased, reflecting the increasing use of intravenous heroin in the state. This review discusses up-to-date guidelines for screening, diagnosis, and treatment of HCV. New direct-acting antiviral medications have revolutionized the treatment of HCV with significantly improved outcomes. High cost and limited availability of these medications present challenges in overall management of HCV.

Treatment of osteoporosis: current state of the art.

Osteoporosis can be treated with medications and lifestyle changes, including avoiding a sedentary lifestyle, alcohol, and smoking. We will identify medications that protect against hip fractures in addition to vertebral fractures, and explore new evidence of adverse effects and risks. Bisphosphonates are used as first-line treatment. We will discuss the latest osteoporosis medications, drug interactions, potential bone protective effects of other drug classes, and the evidence of exercise and kyphoplasty.

Management of Women at High Risk for Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Primary care clinicians screen for breast cancer risk factors and assess the risk level of their patients. Women at high risk for breast cancer (eg, 5-year risk of at least 3% or lifetime risk of ≥20%) are eligible for enhanced screening and/or chemoprophylaxis. However, many clinicians do not identify women at high risk and offer appropriate referrals, screening, or chemoprophylaxis. METHODS: We reviewed a sample of 200 charts of women ages 35 to 50 years old with a family history of breast cancer. We identified factors that contribute to their risk for breast cancer and used the Tyrer-Cuzick Risk Assessment Calculator to determine their personal lifetime risk. We then assessed whether these patients received counseling for chemoprophylaxis, referrals, or screening. We also looked for correlations between combinations of risk factors and increased lifetime risk. RESULTS: Out of 200 charts reviewed, 71 women were identified as high risk for breast cancer (lifetime risk of ≥20%). Of those 71 women, just 17 were referred to a high-risk clinic for enhanced screening and/or chemoprophylaxis. Three risk factors, mammographic breast density of category C or D, first degree relatives with breast cancer, and age first given birth if after 30 years old had a significant impact on lifetime risk for breast cancer. DISCUSSION: Primary care clinicians can use these independent risk factors as cues to pursue a more formal calculation of a woman's lifetime risk for breast cancer and make appropriate referrals for enhanced screening and chemoprophylaxis counseling if indicated.

African American women's experiences of menopause: A focus group study.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to characterize African American women's experiences of menopause and their interactions with the health care system related to menopausal symptoms. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted four focus groups with community-dwelling midlife African American women. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: Women who consented to participate completed demographic surveys. Transcripts of the four focus groups (n = 26) were analyzed and themes were elucidated. RESULTS: In total, 26 midlife African American women participated in the four focus groups. Participants revealed unmet needs regarding obtaining menopause information from their clinicians. Clinician discussions about menopause tended to be initiated by patients based on their symptoms. Some women reported feeling ignored and/or dismissed by the clinician when they initiated discussions of menopause. Women wanted their clinicians to provide information on menopause, which included receiving information prior to the menopause transition to help them know what to expect. CONCLUSION: Women wanted their clinicians to initiate discussions of menopause rather than wait for women to mention symptoms. Prioritizing menopause training for clinicians taking care of midlife African American women may help to improve discussions of menopause.

Evaluation and treatment of endometriosis.

Endometriosis, which affects up to 10 percent of reproductive-aged women, is the presence of endometrial tissue outside of the uterine cavity. It is more common in women with pelvic pain or infertility (25 to 40 percent and 70 to 90 percent, respectively). Some women with endometriosis are asymptomatic, whereas others present with symptoms such as debilitating pelvic pain, dysmenorrhea, dyspareunia, and decreased fertility. Diagnosis of endometriosis in primary care is predominantly clinical. Initial treatment includes common agents used for primary dysmenorrhea, such as nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, combination estrogen/progestin contraceptives, or progestin-only contraceptives. There is some evidence that these agents are helpful and have few adverse effects. Referral to a gynecologist is necessary if symptoms persist or the patient is unable to become pregnant. Laparoscopy is commonly used to confirm the diagnosis before additional treatments are pursued. Further treatments include gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogues, danazol, or surgical removal of ectopic endometrial tissue. These interventions may control symptoms more effectively than initial treatments, but they can have significant adverse effects and limits on duration of therapy.

Team Science Principles Enhance Cancer Care Delivery Quality Improvement: Interdisciplinary Implementation of Breast Cancer Screening Shared Decision Making.

PURPOSE: Implementing shared decision making (SDM), recommended in screening mammography by national guidelines for women age 40-49 years, faces challenges that innovations in quality improvement and team science (TS) are poised to address. We aimed to improve the effectiveness, patient-centeredness, and efficiency of SDM in primary care for breast cancer screening. METHODS: Our interdisciplinary team included primary and specialty care, psychology, epidemiology, communication science, engineering, and stakeholders (patients and clinicians). Over a 6-year period, we executed two iterative cycles of plan-do-study-act (PDSA) to develop, revise, and implement a SDM tool using TS principles. Patient and physician surveys and retrospective analysis of tool performance informed our first PDSA cycle. Patient and physician surveys, toolkit use, and clinical outcomes in the second PDSA cycle supported SDM implementation. We gathered team member assessments on the importance of individual TS activities. RESULTS: Our first PDSA cycle successfully generated a SDM tool called Breast Cancer Risk Estimator, deemed valuable by 87% of patients surveyed. Our second PDSA cycle increased Breast Cancer Risk Estimator utilization, from 2,000 sessions in 2017 to 4,097 sessions in 2019 while maintaining early-stage breast cancer diagnoses. Although TS activities such as culture, trust, and communication needed to be sustained throughout the project, shared goals, research/data infrastructure support, and leadership were more important earlier in the project and persisted in the later stages of the project. CONCLUSION: Combining rigorous quality improvement and TS principles can support the complex, interdependent, and interdisciplinary activities necessary to improve cancer care delivery exemplified by our implementation of a breast cancer screening SDM tool.