Psychosocial impact of recurrent urogenital infections: a review.

Recurrent urogenital infections such as bacterial vaginosis, vulvovaginal candidiasis, and urinary tract infections have a high prevalence and pronounced psychosocial impact. However, no review has compared the psychosocial impacts across infection types. This narrative review discusses the impact of common recurrent urogenital infections on psychosocial aspects, including quality of life, stress, mental health, sexual health, work productivity, race and ethnicity, and satisfaction of medical care. Validated questionnaires show that women with recurrent vulvovaginal candidiasis and urinary tract infections have decreased scores on all aspects of quality of life. Those with recurrent vulvovaginal candidiasis and urinary tract infections show lower mental health scores compared to the general population, with increased risk of anxiety and depression. Recurrent urogenital infections affect sexual relationships and intimacy, including avoidance due to symptoms or as a method of prevention. Recurrent infections also increase medical cost and negatively affect work productivity, leading to a combined estimated cost of over US$13 billion per year. There are clear effects of racial inequality involving minority populations that affect diagnosis, treatment, prevalence, and reporting of recurrent urogenital infections. Satisfactory medical treatment improves quality of life and mental health in those suffering from these conditions. Research evaluating psychosocial aspects of recurrent urogenital infections is variable and is not comparable across vulvovaginal conditions. Even so, psychosocial factors are important in understanding contribution and consequence of urogenital infections. Education, awareness, normalization, community support, and access to care can help to alleviate the negative implications of recurrent urogenital infections.

A narrative review discussing the psychosocial impact of common recurrent urogenital infections and highlights areas where further research is needed to improve clinical care.

More than blood: app-tracking reveals variability in heavy menstrual bleeding construct.

BACKGROUND: Heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) is associated with impaired quality of life and may signal serious health problems. Unresolved challenges in measuring menstrual bleeding and identifying HMB have hampered research and clinical care. Self-reported bleeding histories are commonly used but these may be influenced by recall bias, personal beliefs regarding "normal" flow volume, and the experience of other physical symptoms or disruptions to daily life. The potential usefulness of menstrual-tracking mobile applications, which allow real-time user-entered data recording, for assessing HMB has not been studied. We evaluated recall bias in reported period duration, the relationship of tracked period duration and daily flow volume to subsequently reported period heaviness, variation in quality of life associated with increasing period heaviness, and the advantages and limitations of using app-tracked data for clinical and research purposes. METHODS: An online questionnaire was distributed to current users of Clue, a commercially available menstrual health tracking app, asking them to characterize their last period. We compared responses to the user's corresponding Clue app-tracked data. The study sample comprised 6546 U.S.-based users (aged 18-45 years). RESULTS: Increasing reported heaviness was associated with increasing app-tracked period length and days of heavy flow, impaired quality-of-life (especially body pain severity), and disrupted activities. Of those reporting having had a heavy/very heavy period, ~ 18% had not tracked any heavy flow, but their period length and quality-of-life indicators were similar to those who had tracked heavy flow. Sexual/romantic activities were the most affected across all flow volumes. Compared to app-tracked data, 44% recalled their exact period length; 83% recalled within ± 1 day. Overestimation was more common than underestimation. However, those with longer app-tracked periods were more likely to underestimate period length by ≥ 2 days, a pattern which could contribute to under-diagnosis of HMB. CONCLUSION: Period heaviness is a complex construct that encapsulates flow volume and, for many, several other bleeding-associated experiences (period length, bodily impairments, disruptions of daily activities). Even very precise flow volume assessments cannot capture the multi-faceted nature of HMB as experienced by the individual. Real-time app-tracking facilitates quick daily recording of several aspects of bleeding-associated experiences. This more reliable and detailed characterization of bleeding patterns and experiences can potentially increase understanding of menstrual bleeding variability and, if needed, help to guide treatment.