Believing women: a qualitative exploration of provider disbelief and pain dismissal among women with interstitial cystitis/bladder pain syndrome from the MAPP research network.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Although allusions to the importance of a good physician-patient relationship are present throughout the interstitial cystitis/bladder pain syndrome (IC/BPS) literature, qualitative analysis of patients' perspectives on the clinical encounter is lacking, particularly among women who are most commonly affected by IC/BPS. Therefore, we adopted a patient-centered experiential approach to understanding female patients' perception of clinical encounters. METHODS: We re-analyzed previously collected data from a qualitative study on patient flare experiences including eight focus groups of female IC/BPS patients (n = 57, mean = 7/group). Qualitative analysis applied grounded theory to index all physician-patient interactions, then thematically coded these interactions to elucidate common experiences of clinical encounters. RESULTS: Women with IC/BPS shared common experiences of provider disbelief and pain dismissal. Discussions with participants demonstrated the extent to which these negative encounters shape patients' health care-seeking behavior, outlook, and psychosocial well-being. Appearing in more than one guise, provider disbelief and dismissal occurred as tacit insinuations, explicit statements, silence, oversimplification, and an unwillingness to listen and discuss alternative treatment. As a result, women adopted several strategies including: rotating specialists; "testing" physicians; self-advocacy; self-management; avoiding the stigma of chronic pain; crying; and opting for alternative medicine over biomedicine. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of provider disbelief and pain dismissal among women with IC/BPS indicates a need to improve physician-patient communication, informed by the struggles, anxieties, and gendered inequities that female patients with chronic pain experience in their diagnostic journey. Results suggest that further investigation into the power dynamics of clinical encounters might be required.

Effectiveness of Botulinum Toxin for Treatment of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Myofascial Pain in Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: The aims of the study were to systematically review the literature and to synthesize the evidence for the effectiveness of botulinum toxin injection to the pelvic floor muscles for treating pelvic floor myofascial pain in female patients. METHODS: This systematic literature search was performed in February 2018 and updated in September 2019. Articles were screened based on predefined criteria: (1) adult population, (2) female patients, (3) treatment of pelvic pain by transvaginal botulinum toxin injection into the pelvic floor, (4) published in English or English translation available, (5) study design including randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, and case series with more than 10 participants, and (6) quantitative report of pain scores. Nine studies were included in the primary analysis, and an unpublished study was included in a sensitivity analysis. A random effects model with robust variance estimation was used to estimate the pooled mean difference in patient-reported pain scores after botulinum toxin injection. RESULTS: A statistically significant reduction in patient-reported pain scores was noted at 6 weeks after botulinum toxin injection (mean difference, 20.3; 95% confidence interval, 11.7-28.9) and continued past 12 weeks (mean difference, 19.4; 95% confidence interval, 14.6-24.2). Significant improvement was noted in secondary outcomes including dyspareunia, dyschezia, and quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review and meta-analysis support the conduct of future, large-scale randomized controlled trials to determine the efficacy and optimize administration of botulinum toxin injections for treatment of pelvic floor myofascial pain and associated symptoms in women.

Does Pollen Trigger Urological Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome Flares? A Case-Crossover Analysis in the Multidisciplinary Approach to the Study of Chronic Pelvic Pain Research Network.

PURPOSE: We sought to determine whether pollen triggers urological chronic pelvic pain syndrome flares. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We assessed flare status every 2 weeks for 1 year as part of the Multidisciplinary Approach to the Study of Chronic Pelvic Pain case-crossover analysis of flare triggers (NCT01098279). Flare symptoms, flare start date and exposures in the 3 days before a flare were queried for the first 3 flares and at 3 randomly selected nonflare times. These data were linked to daily pollen count by date and the first 3 digits of participants' zip codes. Pollen count in the 3 days before and day of a flare, as well as pollen rises past established thresholds, were compared to nonflare values by conditional logistic regression. Poisson regression was used to estimate flare rates in the 3 weeks following pollen rises past established thresholds in the full longitudinal study. Analyses were performed in all participants and separately in those who reported allergies or respiratory tract disorders. RESULTS: Although no associations were observed for daily pollen count and flare onset, positive associations were observed for pollen count rises past medium or higher thresholds in participants with allergies or respiratory tract disorders in the case-crossover (OR 1.31, 95% CI 1.04-1.66) and full longitudinal (RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.03-1.46) samples. CONCLUSIONS: We found some evidence to suggest that rising pollen count may trigger flares of urological chronic pelvic pain syndrome. If confirmed in future studies, these findings may help to inform flare pathophysiology, prevention and treatment, and control over the unpredictability of flares.

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug use and the risk of benign prostatic hyperplasia-related outcomes and nocturia in the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial.

UNLABELLED: Study Type - Therapy (cohort) Level of Evidence 4. What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Accumulating evidence suggests that inflammation may contribute to the development of BPH and LUTS. Therefore, it is plausible that anti-inflammatory agents, such as aspirin and other NSAIDs, may reduce the risk of BPH/LUTS, as was observed in a recent analysis of daily aspirin use and BPH/LUTS risk in the Olmsted County Study of Urinary Symptoms and Health Status in Men. The present study, conducted in the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial, found no association for recent aspirin or ibuprofen use with the risk of BPH/LUTS. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the relationship between non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) use and the incidence of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH)-related outcomes and nocturia, a lower urinary tract symptom (LUTS) of BPH, in light of accumulating evidence suggesting a role for inflammation in BPH/LUTS development. PATIENTS AND METHODS: At baseline, participants in the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial completed questions on recent, regular aspirin and ibuprofen use, BPH surgery, diagnosis of an enlarged prostate/BPH, and nocturia. Participants in the intervention arm also underwent a digital rectal examination (DRE), from which prostate dimensions were estimated, as well as a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test. Only participants in the intervention arm without BPH/LUTS at baseline were included in the analysis (n= 4771). • During follow-up, participants underwent annual DREs and PSA tests, provided annual information on finasteride use, and completed a supplemental questionnaire in 2006-2008 that included additional questions on diagnosis of an enlarged prostate/BPH and nocturia. • Information collected was used to investigate regular aspirin or ibuprofen use in relation to the incidence of six BPH/LUTS definitions: diagnosis of an enlarged prostate/BPH, nocturia (waking two or more times per night to urinate), finasteride use, any self-reported BPH/LUTS, prostate enlargement (estimated prostate volume ≥30 mL on any follow-up DRE) and elevation in PSA level (>1.4 ng/mL on any follow-up PSA test). RESULTS: Generally, null results were observed for any recent, regular aspirin or ibuprofen use (risk ratio = 0.92-1.21, P= 0.043-0.91) and frequency of use (risk ratios for one category increase in NSAID use = 0.98-1.11, P-trends = 0.10-0.99) with incident BPH/LUTS. CONCLUSION: The findings obtained in the present study do not support a protective role for recent NSAID use in BPH/LUTS development.