Contraception choices in women with underlying medical conditions.

Primary care physicians often prescribe contraceptives to women of reproductive age with comorbidities. Novel delivery systems (e.g., contraceptive patch, contraceptive ring, single-rod implantable device) may change traditional risk and benefit profiles in women with comorbidities. Effective contraceptive counseling requires an understanding of a woman's preferences and medical history, as well as the risks, benefits, adverse effects, and contraindications of each method. Noncontraceptive benefits of combined hormonal contraceptives, such as oral contraceptive pills, include regulated menses, decreased dysmenorrhea, and diminished premenstrual dysphoric disorder. Oral contraceptive pills may be used safely in women with a range of medical conditions, including well-controlled hypertension, uncomplicated diabetes mellitus, depression, and uncomplicated valvular heart disease. However, women older than 35 years who smoke should avoid oral contraceptive pills. Contraceptives containing estrogen, which can increase thrombotic risk, should be avoided in women with a history of venous thromboembolism, stroke, cardiovascular disease, or peripheral vascular disease. Progestin-only contraceptives are recommended for women with contraindications to estrogen. Depo-Provera, a long-acting injectable contraceptive, may be preferred in women with sickle cell disease because it reduces the frequency of painful crises. Because of the interaction between antiepileptics and oral contraceptive pills, Depo-Provera may also be considered in women with epilepsy. Implanon, the single-rod implantable contraceptive device, may reduce symptoms of dysmenorrhea. Mirena, the levonorgestrel-containing intrauterine contraceptive system, is an option for women with menorrhagia, endometriosis, or chronic pelvic pain.

Evidence in the learning organization.

BACKGROUND: Organizational leaders in business and medicine have been experiencing a similar dilemma: how to ensure that their organizational members are adopting work innovations in a timely fashion. Organizational leaders in healthcare have attempted to resolve this dilemma by offering specific solutions, such as evidence-based medicine (EBM), but organizations are still not systematically adopting evidence-based practice innovations as rapidly as expected by policy-makers (the knowing-doing gap problem). Some business leaders have adopted a systems-based perspective, called the learning organization (LO), to address a similar dilemma. Three years ago, the Society of General Internal Medicine's Evidence-based Medicine Task Force began an inquiry to integrate the EBM and LO concepts into one model to address the knowing-doing gap problem. METHODS: During the model development process, the authors searched several databases for relevant LO frameworks and their related concepts by using a broad search strategy. To identify the key LO frameworks and consolidate them into one model, the authors used consensus-based decision-making and a narrative thematic synthesis guided by several qualitative criteria. The authors subjected the model to external, independent review and improved upon its design with this feedback. RESULTS: The authors found seven LO frameworks particularly relevant to evidence-based practice innovations in organizations. The authors describe their interpretations of these frameworks for healthcare organizations, the process they used to integrate the LO frameworks with EBM principles, and the resulting Evidence in the Learning Organization (ELO) model. They also provide a health organization scenario to illustrate ELO concepts in application. CONCLUSION: The authors intend, by sharing the LO frameworks and the ELO model, to help organizations identify their capacities to learn and share knowledge about evidence-based practice innovations. The ELO model will need further validation and improvement through its use in organizational settings and applied health services research.

Best practices in LGBT care: A guide for primary care physicians.

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people have unique healthcare needs. While all LGBT people are at an increased risk for mental health and substance abuse disorders, certain health conditions vary by group. Overweight and obesity are more common in lesbian and bisexual women, whereas sexual minority men are at increased risk for infections such as human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and syphilis. Breast, cervical, and prostate cancer screening should be offered to all LGBT individuals according to national guidelines and with consideration of a transgender person's natal and surgical anatomy.

Contraception for the perimenopausal woman: What's best?

Finding the optimal method of birth control for women in their 40s requires careful attention to medical history, risk factors, and perimenopausal symptoms, as well as the risk of unintended pregnancy.

Helping women choose appropriate hormonal contraception: update on risks, benefits, and indications.

Primary care physicians frequently provide contraceptive counseling to women who are interested in family planning, have medical conditions that may be worsened by pregnancy, or have medical conditions that necessitate the use of potentially teratogenic medications. Effective counseling requires up-to-date knowledge about hormonal contraceptive methods that differ in hormone dosage, cycle length, and hormone-free intervals and are delivered by oral, transdermal, transvaginal, injectable, or implantable routes. Effective counseling also requires an understanding of a woman's preferences and medical history as well as the risks, benefits, side effects, and contraindications of each contraceptive method. This article is designed to update physicians on this information.

A pilot study exploring gender differences in residents' strategies for establishing mentoring relationships.

BACKGROUND: Mentoring is important throughout a physician's career and has been noted to be particularly important during residency training. Other studies suggest that women may experience difficulty in finding mentors. PURPOSE: This study explored gender-specific differences in residents' mentoring experiences. METHODS: The authors conducted two focus groups at the University of Pittsburgh in July, 2004. One group was composed of 12 female residents; the other was composed of nine male residents. Discussions were audiotaped and transcribed. Two investigators coded the transcripts and identified emerging themes. RESULTS: Residents of both genders cited multiple barriers to mentoring. Men's strategies for finding mentors were more numerous than women's and included identifying mentors through research, similar interests, friendship, and networking. Female strategies were limited and included identifying mentors through "word of mouth" and work experiences. Women described more passive approaches for finding a mentor than men. CONCLUSIONS: Female residents may lack strategies and initiatives for finding mentors. Residency programs should create opportunities for residents to develop mentoring relationships, with special attention paid to gender differences.