Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 5 de 5
Filtrar
Más filtros










Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38204436

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to explore patient demographic factors associated with counseling against breastfeeding and concurrent marijuana use. METHODS: A cross-sectional study derived using data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention administered Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS) in collaboration with state and local health departments. This study sample included survey participants whose responses indicate they received counseling discouraging breastfeeding with concurrent marijuana use. Bivariate and multivariate regression analyses assessed the relationship between factors associated with counseling against breastfeeding and concurrent marijuana use. RESULTS: Of the 10,911 participants in this sample, 9,695 participants who answered the question about receiving counseling discouraging breastfeeding while using marijuana were included in the analysis (89% response rate for the total sample). Twenty nine percent of participants were advised by a provider not to breastfeed while using marijuana. Participants who received this counseling were more likely to be people of color, age less than or equal to 29, with a high school education or less, unmarried, report governmental or no insurance prepregnancy, and report marijuana use postpartum. In the multivariate analysis, age less than or equal to 20 (P = .001), being unmarried (P = .023), and marijuana use postpartum (P = .034) remained associated with counseling against breastfeeding. DISCUSSION: Our results suggest that individuals are being counseled differently. Unmarried and young people (age <20 years) were more likely to report receiving counseling against breastfeeding with concurrent marijuana use. Given the growing national acceptability of marijuana use, the known benefits of breastfeeding, and the unclear risks of marijuana in human milk, there is a need to standardize counseling to avoid a missed opportunity to educate breastfeeding populations who use marijuana and to reduce the risk of counseling based on providers' personal attitudes and biases not aligned with evidence-based guidelines.

2.
J Assist Reprod Genet ; 36(10): 2095-2101, 2019 Oct.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31410635

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: To explore clinical benefit of performing two intrauterine inseminations (IUI) 24 h apart-a double IUI vs. a single IUI among lesbian and single women. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study using electronic medical record review during a 17-year period (11/1999-3/2017). A total of 11,396 patients at a single academic-affiliated private practice were included in this study. All cycles with a single or double IUI were included. A sub-analysis of first cycles only (n = 10,413) was also performed. Canceled IVF cycles converted to IUI were excluded. T tests and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used for continuous data, and chi-square for categorical data. Multivariable logistic regression controlled for patient age, day 3 follicle-stimulating hormone (D3 FSH), body mass index (BMI), peak estradiol (E2), and post-wash total motile sperm counts to model the association between IUI number and ongoing pregnancy rate (OPR) according to sperm source (autologous vs. donor). Generalized estimating equations and mixed effect models accounted for multiple cycles from the same woman. Adjusted odds ratio (AOR) with 95% CI was determined. Sub-analyses of sexual orientation and partner status were performed to compare heterosexual couples with proven infertility to women with lesbian and single women. RESULTS: During the study period, 22,452 cycles met inclusion criteria (single IUI 1283 vs. double IUI 21,169). Mean patient age and BMI were similar between groups. For couples using autologous sperm, OPR was significantly higher with double IUI (12.0% vs. 14.1%; p = 0.0380). A similar increase was observed for donor sperm OPR among heterosexual couples (14.4% vs. 16.2%), though this did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.395). A sub-analysis restricted to donor sperm demonstrates a clinical benefit of second IUI in heterosexual couples, 8.5% vs. 17.6% OPR (AOR 2.94; CI 1.00-10.99; p = 0.0496). When lesbian and single patients were evaluated, there was no difference (17.2% vs. 15.2%; AOR 0.99; CI 0.59-1.70; p = 0.0958). CONCLUSIONS: Double IUI is associated with a significantly higher OPR for heterosexual couples using an autologous or donor sperm source. The benefit of a second IUI is less clear in patients with undocumented fertility status using donor sperm, such as single and lesbian women.


Asunto(s)
Fertilización In Vitro/estadística & datos numéricos , Infertilidad/terapia , Inseminación Artificial/estadística & datos numéricos , Espermatozoides/trasplante , Registros Electrónicos de Salud , Femenino , Fertilidad/fisiología , Fertilización/fisiología , Fertilización In Vitro/métodos , Hormona Folículo Estimulante/uso terapéutico , Humanos , Infertilidad/epidemiología , Inseminación Artificial/métodos , Masculino , Embarazo , Índice de Embarazo , Minorías Sexuales y de Género , Recuento de Espermatozoides
3.
J Assist Reprod Genet ; 36(7): 1449-1456, 2019 Jul.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31134412

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: To explore associations between infertility treatment and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. METHODS: We collated multi-year as well as multi-state data from a national representative survey examining the association between self-reported infertility treatment (i.e., medication, intrauterine insemination, or assisted reproductive technology) and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (i.e., high blood pressure, pregnancy-induced hypertension (PIH), preeclampsia, and toxemia). Data were analyzed using logistic regression. A total of 21,884 women in the United States (U.S.), from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS) survey (2009-2015), participated in the study. RESULTS: In our analysis, 12.91% women reported a history of infertility treatment and 15.19% reported a history of hypertensive disorder of pregnancy. Compared with women who had never had infertility treatment, women who reported infertility treatment had 1.18 (adjusted OR, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.05, 1.33) higher odds of reporting hypertensive disorder of pregnancy. Neither types of infertility treatment nor proximity of treatment to pregnancy were independently associated with hypertensive disorder of pregnancy. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that among U.S. women, the treatment of infertility may be associated with hypertension disorder of pregnancy regardless of type of treatment.


Asunto(s)
Hipertensión Inducida en el Embarazo/epidemiología , Infertilidad/terapia , Adulto , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. , Femenino , Fertilización In Vitro/tendencias , Humanos , Hipertensión Inducida en el Embarazo/etiología , Hipertensión Inducida en el Embarazo/patología , Infertilidad/complicaciones , Infertilidad/epidemiología , Embarazo , Técnicas Reproductivas Asistidas , Medición de Riesgo , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Estados Unidos/epidemiología
4.
Clin Case Rep ; 7(12): 2495-2499, 2019 Dec.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31893087

RESUMEN

As the field of neurogenetics is expanding rapidly and variant classification criteria evolve, genetic variants in databases are re-evaluated overtime allowing updated classifications of pathogenicity predication. When caring for patients with genetic disorders, it is important to obtain the original genetic report and also consider an updated reanalysis.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...