Vasectomy occlusion techniques for male sterilization.

BACKGROUND: Vasectomy is an increasingly popular and effective family planning method. A variety of vasectomy techniques are used worldwide, including vas occlusion techniques (excision and ligation, thermal or electrocautery, and mechanical and chemical occlusion methods), as well as vasectomy with vas irrigation or with fascial interposition. Vasectomy guidelines largely rely on information from observational studies. Ideally, the choice of vasectomy techniques should be based on the evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review was to compare the effectiveness, safety, acceptability and costs of vasectomy techniques for male sterilization. SEARCH METHODS: In February 2014, we updated the searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, POPLINE and LILACS. We looked for recent clinical trials in ClinicalTrials.gov and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. Previous searches also included EMBASE. For the initial review, we searched the reference lists of relevant articles and book chapters. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included RCTs comparing vasectomy techniques, which could include suture ligature, surgical clips, thermal or electrocautery, chemical occlusion, vas plugs, vas excision, open-ended vas, fascial interposition, or vas irrigation. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We assessed all titles and abstracts located in the literature searches. Two reviewers independently extracted data from articles identified for inclusion. Outcome measures include contraceptive efficacy, safety, discontinuation, and acceptability. Peto odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used for dichotomous outcomes, such as azoospermia. The mean difference (MD) was used for the continuous variable of operating time. MAIN RESULTS: Six studies met the inclusion criteria. One trial compared vas occlusion with clips versus a conventional vasectomy technique. No difference was found in failure to reach azoospermia (no sperm detected). Three trials examined vasectomy with vas irrigation. Two studies looked at irrigation with water versus no irrigation, while one examined irrigation with water versus the spermicide euflavine. None found a difference between the groups for time to azoospermia. However, one trial reported that the median number of ejaculations to azoospermia was lower in the euflavine group compared to the water irrigation group. One high-quality trial compared vasectomy with fascial interposition versus vasectomy without fascial interposition. The fascial interposition group was less likely to have vasectomy failure. Fascial interposition had more surgical difficulties, but the groups were similar in side effects. Lastly, one trial found that an intra-vas was less likely to produce azoospermia than was no-scalpel vasectomy. More men were satisfied with the intra-vas device, however. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: For vas occlusion with clips or vasectomy with vas irrigation, no conclusions can be made as those studies were of low quality and underpowered. Fascial interposition reduced vasectomy failure. An intra-vas device was less effective in reducing sperm count than was no-scalpel vasectomy. RCTs examining other vasectomy techniques were not available. More and better quality research is needed to examine vasectomy techniques.

Scalpel versus no-scalpel incision for vasectomy.

BACKGROUND: Currently, the two most common surgical techniques for approaching the vas during vasectomy are the incisional method and the no-scalpel technique. Whereas the conventional incisional technique involves the use of a scalpel to make one or two incisions, the no-scalpel technique uses a sharp-pointed, forceps-like instrument to puncture the skin. The no-scalpel technique aims to reduce adverse events, especially bleeding, bruising, hematoma, infection and pain and to shorten the operating time. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review was to compare the effectiveness, safety, and acceptability of the incisional versus no-scalpel approach to the vas. SEARCH METHODS: In February 2014, we searched the computerized databases of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, POPLINE and LILACS. We looked for recent clinical trials in ClinicalTrials.gov and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. Previous searches also included in EMBASE. For the initial review, we searched the reference lists of relevant articles and book chapters. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials and controlled clinical trials were included in this review. No language restrictions were placed on the reporting of the trials. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We assessed all titles and abstracts located in the literature searches and two authors independently extracted data from the articles identified for inclusion. Outcome measures included safety, acceptability, operating time, contraceptive efficacy, and discontinuation. We calculated Peto odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the dichotomous variables. MAIN RESULTS: Two randomized controlled trials evaluated the no-scalpel technique and differed in their findings. The larger trial demonstrated less perioperative bleeding (OR 0.49; 95% CI 0.27 to 0.89) and pain during surgery (OR 0.75; 95% CI 0.61 to 0.93), scrotal pain (OR 0.63; 95% 0.50 to 0.80), and incisional infection (OR 0.21; 95% CI 0.06 to 0.78) during follow up than the standard incisional group. Both studies found less hematoma with the no-scalpel technique (OR 0.23; 95% CI 0.15 to 0.36). Operations using the no-scalpel approach were faster and had a quicker resumption of sexual activity. The smaller study did not find these differences; however, the study could have failed to detect differences due to a small sample size as well as a high loss to follow up. Neither trial found differences in vasectomy effectiveness between the two approaches to the vas. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The no-scalpel approach to the vas resulted in less bleeding, hematoma, infection, and pain as well as a shorter operation time than the traditional incision technique. No difference in effectiveness was found between the two approaches.

Improving the evidence-base for access to primary health care in Canterbury: a panel study.

OBJECTIVE: Despite many reforms and initiatives, inequities in access to primary health care remain. However, the concept of 'access' and its measurement is complex. This paper aims to provide estimates of general practice visit frequencies for 'attenders' (those who seek consultation) and the proportion of 'non-attenders' (those who never seek consultation) of primary health care services. METHODS: A panel study of people enrolled within a large primary health care organisation of affiliated general practices. Standard and zero-inflated regression models were assessed. RESULTS: 980,918 visits were made by 388,424 people, averaging 2.64 visits/person/year. The zero-inflated negative binomial model was superior, and significant age, gender and ethnic differences were observed in attender and non-attender profiles. More Asian (21.0%), Pacific (19.6%) and Maori (17.1%) people were non-attenders than European/Other (9.0%) people. Among attenders, males, Asian and Pacific people, and young to middle-aged adults, generally had relatively lower visit rates. CONCLUSIONS: Interpretation of utilisation data must be made with caution because of two distinct characteristics: the differential rates of non-attenders and the highly dispersed distribution of attenders. IMPLICATIONS: Improved understanding of differential non-attender rates and attender visit distributions by demographic factors needs to be considered when addressing improved access to general practice services.

Is it time to talk? Interpreter services use in general practice within Canterbury.

INTRODUCTION: Effective communication is fundamental to successful health care service delivery, and has a positive impact on access, quality of care, health outcomes, and patient satisfaction. Although there are a growing number of New Zealanders who do not speak English proficiently, underutilisation of trained interpreter services appears to be common in primary health care settings. AIMS: To describe the pattern of interpreter service need and utilisation by general practice services, and to identify key barriers and enabling factors to the use of trained interpreters. METHODS: A mixed methods study was employed. Census and Partnership Health Canterbury Te Kei o Te Waka (PHC) databases were combined, and quantitative analysis used to derive interpreter service need and utilisation patterns. Transcripts of focus groups and interviews from general practitioners, practice nurses and practice administration staff within the PHC were analysed, using qualitative methods to identify barriers and enablers to interpreter service use. RESULTS: For the years 2008-2010, approximately 10 742 consultations per year involved a non-Englishspeaking patient, yet in only approximately 74.8 (0.7%) consultations per year were interpreter services utilised. Analysis of focus groups and interviews identified four global themes that represented barriers for interpreter service utilisation; namely, practicalities, expectations, knowledge of service, and systems. DISCUSSION: The current use of interpreter services in PHC general practice appears to be significantly less than the need. In order to maximise health outcomes and reduce risk, strategies must be initiated to counter the barriers currently inhibiting interpreter service use, including adopting best practice policies.

Access to general practice for Pacific peoples: a place for cultural competency.

INTRODUCTION: Access to primary health care services has been identified as a problem for Pacific peoples. Although cost is the most frequently cited barrier to Pacific service utilisation, some research has indicated that access may also be influenced by features of mainstream primary care services. This study aimed to identify features of mainstream general practice services that act as barriers to accessing these services for Pacific peoples in order to explore strategies that providers could adopt to enable their practices to be more welcoming, accessible and appropriate for Pacific peoples. METHODS: Pacific participants were recruited through Pacific networks known to Pegasus Health and via 'snowball' sampling. In total, 20 participants participated in one of three focus groups. A semi-structured interview explored the participants' views and experiences of mainstream general practice care. Thematic analysis was utilised to interpret the data. FINDINGS: The analysis revealed five themes highlighting non-financial features of mainstream general practice services that may influence the availability and acceptability of these services to Pacific peoples: language and communication; rushed consultations; appointment availability; reception; and Pacific presence. CONCLUSION: The findings indicate that all personnel within the primary care setting have the ability to directly engage in the improvement of the health status of Pacific peoples in New Zealand by developing cultural competency and incorporating flexibility and diversity into the care and service they provide.

Appetite for life: an evaluation of a primary care lifestyle programme.

INTRODUCTION: Appetite for Life is a six-week primary care-based programme for women who are overweight, and aims to achieve long-term health gain through establishing healthy eating and physical activity patterns and a healthier weight. AIM: To evaluate the outcomes of Appetite for Life, a primary care-based healthy lifestyle programme for women who are overweight. METHODS: Two hundred and sixty-one women enrolled and consented to take part in the six-week Appetite for Life programme via general practice and were followed for 12 months. Eating behaviours and physical activity levels were measured at baseline, six weeks, six months and 12 months. Anthropometric and biomedical data was collected at visits to the participants' general practitioners at baseline and 12 months. RESULTS: Positive lifestyle changes were reported that were sustained for the duration of the 12-month follow-up period. Participants reported an increase in intake of fruit and vegetables, dairy products, healthy fats and an increased level of physical activity. There was also an increase in reported enjoyment and participation in exercise. Mean weight was maintained over this time period. There was a reduction in mean LDL and total plasma cholesterol. DISCUSSION: A healthy lifestyle programme offered through primary care that is based on a non-dieting approach may help overweight women develop and sustain positive lifestyle changes.