RESUMEN
Objectives: While it is well documented that abortion access is associated with improved health, pregnancy-related, and socioeconomic outcomes, the association between abortion access and other reproductive health outcomes is less well described. Abortion-providing clinics also offer preventative reproductive health services. We conducted a scoping review to ascertain the extent to which preventive reproductive healthcare services (contraception, sexually transmitted infection testing and treatment, cervical cancer screening) are affected by abortion access in the United States. Methods: Researchers screened articles and extracted data from PubMed, Embase, Scopus and CINAHL. We excluded articles that did not link abortion to contraception, sexually transmitted infection testing and treatment and cervical cancer screening; or took place outside the US. Results: 5,359 papers were screened, 74 were included for full text review. Sixty-five were about contraception, seven on STIs, one on cervical cancer screening, and one on other services. The association between policies that restrict or protect abortion access and preventative health services has not been studied on a national scale. Drivers of variation were: insurance and billing policies; regulatory requirements of abortion-providing facilities, lack of staff training in clinics that did not specialize in abortion care; and limited follow up after abortion. Conclusions: Abortion--providing clinics are a highly utilized access point for reproductive health services. More research is needed to determine the public health impact of constrained abortion access on contraceptive use, STI rates and cervical cancer in regions where many abortion-providing clinics have closed. Implications: Attention should be paid to changing trends in contraceptive use, STI rates and cervical cancer as abortion-providing clinics close, this may reduce access to reproductive health services broadly.
RESUMEN
Automated insulin delivery (AID) systems play an important role in the management of type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). These systems include three components: a continuous glucose monitor (CGM), an insulin pump and an algorithm that adjusts the pump based on the CGM sensor glucose readings. They are not fully automated and still require the user to administer bolus insulin doses for food. Some AID systems have automatic correction boluses, while others only have automatic basal or background insulin adjustments. As CGM has become more accurate and the technology has evolved, AID systems have demonstrated improved glycaemic outcomes. The clinical evaluation of AID systems in randomized controlled trials and real-world studies have shown their utility in helping glycaemic management. In this review, we compare AID systems that are commercially available in the US and summarize the literature, with a special focus on time in range in T1DM. The review also discusses new AID systems on the horizon and explores considerations for personalized care.
RESUMEN
Diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) is a major complication of diabetes mellitus. Tight glycaemic management focused on lowering haemoglobin A1C and increasing time in the target glucose range along with metabolic risk factor management form the cornerstone of DPN prevention. However, there is limited evidence supporting the efficacy of glycaemic and metabolic control in reducing the symptoms and complications of DPN, including pain once painful DPN develops. DPN treatments include pharmacological agents and non-pharmacological interventions such as foot care and lifestyle modifications. Pharmacological agents primarily address pain symptoms, which affect 25-35% of people with DPN. First-line agents include the anticonvulsants pregabalin and gabapentin, the serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors duloxetine and venlafaxine, and secondary amine tricyclic antidepressants, including nortriptyline and desipramine. All agents have unique pharmacological, safety and clinical profiles, and agent selection should be guided by the presence of comorbidities, potential for adverse effects, drug interactions and costs. Even with the current treatment options, people are commonly prescribed less than the recommended dose of medications, leading to poor management of DPN symptoms and treatment discontinuation. By keeping up with the latest therapy algorithms and treatment options, healthcare professionals can improve the care for people with DPN.
