Objective: To provide an update on the current understanding, evaluation, and management of penile warts.
Methods: A PubMed search was completed in Clinical Queries using the key terms 'penile warts' and 'genital warts'. The search strategy included meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, clinical trials, observational studies, and reviews.
Results: Penile warts are caused by human papillomavirus (HPV), notably HPV-6 and HPV-11. Penile warts typically present as asymptomatic papules or plaques. Lesions may be filiform, exophytic, papillomatous, verrucous, hyperkeratotic, cerebriform, fungating, or cauliflower-like. Approximately one-third of penile warts regress without treatment and the average duration prior to resolution is approximately 9 months. Active treatment is preferable to watchful observation to speed up clearance of the lesions and to assuage fears of transmission and autoinoculation. Patient-administered therapies include podofilox (0.5%) solution or gel, imiquimod 3.75 or 5% cream, and sinecatechins (polypheron E) 15% ointment. Clinician-administered therapies include podophyllin, cryotherapy, bichloroacetic or trichloroacetic acid, oral cimetidine, surgical excision, electrocautery, and carbon dioxide laser therapy. Patients who do not respond to first-line treatments may respond to other therapies or a combination of treatment modalities. Second-line therapies include topical/intralesional/intravenous cidofovir, topical 5-fluorouracil, and topical ingenol mebutate.
Conclusion: No single treatment has been shown to be consistently superior to other treatment modalities. The choice of the treatment method should depend on the physician's comfort level with the various treatment options, the patient's preference and tolerability of treatment, and the number and severity of lesions. The comparative efficacy, ease of administration, adverse effects, cost, and availability of the treatment modality should also be taken into consideration.
METHODS: A qualitative study using narrative inquiry was conducted at a public primary care clinic. Ten participants with type 2 diabetes of more than a 1-year duration were selected through purposive sampling. In-depth interviews were conducted using a semi-structured protocol guide and were audio-taped. The interviews were transcribed and the texts were analyzed using a thematic approach with the Atlas.ti ver. 8.0 software (Scientific Software Development GmbH, Berlin, Germany).
RESULTS: Three themes emerged from the analysis. The first theme, "Initial reactions toward diabetes," described the early impression of diabetes encompassing negative emotions, feeling of acceptance, a lack of concern, and low level of perceived efficacy. "Process of discovery" was the second overarching theme marking the journey of participants in finding the exact truth about diabetes and learning the consequences of ignoring their responsibility in diabetes care. The third theme, "Making the right decision," highlighted that fear initiated a decision-making process and together with goal-setting paved the way for participants to reach a turning point, moving toward engagement in their care.
CONCLUSION: Our findings indicated that fear could be a motivator for change, but a correct cognitive appraisal of diabetes and perceived efficacy of the treatment as well as one's ability are essentially the pre-requisites for patients to reach the stage of having the intention to engage.