Sex-specific differences in pain localization in female patients with endometriosis: A comparison of sexless and female human body outlines.

BACKGROUND: This study explores sex-specific differences in pain localization using pain drawings in female patients with endometriosis. Traditional human body outlines (HBOs) used for pain drawings are often viewed as male, making accurate pain assessment difficult. The study aims to compare pain localization and extent between patients presented with sexless and female HBOs. METHODS: A total of 49 female patients with endometriosis completed questionnaires and pain drawings (n = 24 and n = 26 with individually designed sexless and female HBOs, respectively). The Ruzika similarity index was used to investigate potential differences in pain drawings between sexless and female HBOs. Hypothesis testing was applied to compare the number of pixels marked in the pain extents and to investigate the suitability of the presented body outline. RESULTS: Sex of HBOs used in pain drawings had no effect on pain area, and no statistically significant differences were found in pain localization or area between female and sexless outlines. Most, but not all participants found the body outlines suitable. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that differences in the resulting areas marked in the pain drawings were negligible and the preferences for sexless pain drawings were not significant, so that a sexless body outline for pain drawings could be a good choice, especially when a study does not focus on one specific sex.

Risk to Radiology Staff for Occupational COVID-19 Infection in a High-Risk and a Low-Risk Region in Germany: Lessons from the "First Wave". / Risiko radiologischer Mitarbeiter für eine COVID-19-Infektion in einer Hoch- und Niedrigrisikoregion in Deutschland: Lehren aus der "ersten Welle".

PURPOSE: The recent COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in an increasing overload of the medical system. Healthcare workers (HCW) in radiology departments are exposed to a high infection risk similar to HCWs in the ICU or dedicated COVID wards. The goal of our paper is to evaluate the prevalence of IgG antibody against SARS-CoV-2 among radiology HCWs in two different hospitals and regions in Germany with a low and high COVID-19 prevalence and to compare it to the prevalence in other clinical personnel. Additionally, we assessed the number of radiological procedures performed in patients with a positive PCR test (C+) followed by a short review of the risk for nosocomial infections of radiology HCWs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: During the first COVID-19 wave between March and July 2020, we evaluated a region with one of the highest COVID-19 rates (776-1570/100 000) in Germany (Hospital A). Additionally, we assessed Hospital B in a region with a low prevalence (65/100 000). We tested the serum prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies among the whole staff with a subgroup analysis for radiology in both hospitals. We calculated the total number of different radiological procedures performed in C+ patients. RESULTS: In Hospital A 594 PCR-proven C+ patients were treated resulting in 2723 radiological procedures. 24 % (n = 6) of the radiology technicians and 13.35 (n = 2) of radiologists had a positive IgG test. The rates were similar to positive rates in HCWs in COVID-19 wards and ICUs within the hospital. The most frequently performed procedures in C+ patients were chest X-rays (3.17/patient) and CT examinations (1.15/patient). In Hospital B 50 C+ patients were treated, resulting in 64 radiological procedures. None of the HCWs tested IgG positive. The most frequently performed examinations were also chest X-rays (1.04/patient) and CT (0.2/patient). CONCLUSION: HCWs in radiology have a high occupational infection risk similar to that of HCWs in ICUs and dedicated COVID wards. KEY POINTS: · The risk of acquiring COVID-19 increases with the amount of contact with infected individuals.. · The occupational risk of a SARS-CoV-2 infection for radiology staff is similar to that of nurses and physicians in COVID wards.. · Hygiene concepts and medical resources have to be adapted for further COVID outbreaks.. · Reporting of an occupational disease can be considered in the case of seropositive staff.. CITATION FORMAT: · Finkenzeller T, Lenhart S, Reinwald M et al. Risk to Radiology Staff for Occupational COVID-19 Infection in a High-Risk and a Low-Risk Region in Germany: Lessons from the "First Wave". Fortschr Röntgenstr 2021; 193: 537 - 543.

Pain drawings as a diagnostic tool for the differentiation between two pain-associated rare diseases (Ehlers-Danlos-Syndrome, Guillain-Barré-Syndrome).

BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of rare diseases poses a particular challenge to clinicians. This study analyzes whether patients' pain drawings (PDs) help in the differentiation of two pain-associated rare diseases, Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome (EDS) and Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS). METHOD: The study was designed as a prospective, observational, single-center study. The sample comprised 60 patients with EDS (3 male, 52 female, 5 without gender information; 39.2 ± 11.4 years) and 32 patients with GBS (10 male, 20 female, 2 without gender information; 50.5 ± 13.7 years). Patients marked areas afflicted by pain on a sketch of a human body with anterior, posterior, and lateral views. PDs were electronically scanned and processed. Each PD was classified based on the Ruzicka similarity to the EDS and the GBS averaged image (pain profile) in a leave-one-out cross validation approach. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was plotted. RESULTS: 60-80% of EDS patients marked the vertebral column with the neck and the tailbone and the knee joints as pain areas, 40-50% the shoulder-region, the elbows and the thumb saddle joint. 60-70% of GBS patients marked the dorsal and plantar side of the feet as pain areas, 40-50% the palmar side of the fingertips, the dorsal side of the left palm and the tailbone. 86% of the EDS patients and 96% of the GBS patients were correctly identified by computing the Ruzicka similarity. The ROC curve yielded an excellent area under the curve value of 0.95. CONCLUSION: PDs are a useful and economic tool to differentiate between GBS and EDS. Further studies should investigate its usefulness in the diagnosis of other pain-associated rare diseases. This study was registered in the German Clinical Trials Register, No. DRKS00014777 (Deutsches Register klinischer Studien, DRKS), on 01.06.2018.