METHODS: This is a prospective randomized study for evaluation of 84 etonogestrel implant (Implanon) users with prolonged or frequent bleeding. They were assigned to either receiving a COCP containing 20 mcg ethinyl estradiol/150 mg desogestrel for two continuous cycle or NSAID; mefenamic acid 500 mg TDS for 5 days, 21 days apart for two cycles. Bleeding pattern during the treatment was recorded and analyzed.
RESULTS: A total of 32 women (76.2%) in COCP group and 15 women (35.7%) in NSAID group stop bleeding within 7 days after the initiation of treatment which was statistically significant (P
METHODS: A double-blind, multicenter randomized clinical trial was undertaken in four teaching hospitals in the North of Iraq and Al-Azhar University Hospital in Egypt, from March 2016 to May 2019. Group I (274 women) received 400 μg misoprostol and group II (249 women) received 800 μg misoprostol. Data regarding the time of placental separation and amount of vaginal blood loss were analyzed and proportions were compared between groups using Chi-squared test. Mean values were compared using the Student's t-test. The Mann-Whitney test was used to determine the median of vaginal blood loss.
RESULTS: The proportion of placental separation was 84.3% among women in group I and 86.7% of women in group II. The mean time of placental separation was 18.86 ± 234.2 and 17.86 ± 213.09 min in groups I and II, respectively (P
METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted at the Royal Children's Hospital in Melbourne, Australia. Data were collected from medical records of patients presenting with dysmenorrhea and/or pelvic pain.
RESULTS: Of 154 patients, mean age of presentation was 15.7 years (SD = 2.2) and mean duration of pain was 14.9 months (SD = 10.8). Regular cycles were reported by 64.5%, and heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) in 67.8%. Patients self-reporting HMB reported less pain on the day prior to menses than those not reporting HMB (P
METHODS: A randomized trial was performed in a University hospital in Malaysia. Term women scheduled for labor induction, Bishop score ≤ 5, singleton, cephalic presentation, intact membrane, and reassuring pre-induction fetal heart rate tracing were recruited. Women with known gross fetal anomaly, allergy to latex and inability to consent or language difficulty were excluded. Participants were randomized to 16F, 22F, or 28F Foley catheter. Primary outcome was insertion failure and main secondary outcomes were insertion duration and pain (assessed by a Visual Numerical Rating Scale [VNRS] 0-10, higher score more pain). Analysis is done by analysis of variance (ANOVA), Kruskal-Wallis, and chi square test across the three arms and by t test and Mann-Whitney U test for pair wise comparisons.
RESULTS: One hundred twenty-seven participants' data were analyzed. The insertion failure 7/43(16%) versus 4/42(10%) versus 5/42(12%), p = 0.64, insertion duration median [IQR] 2.8 [1.8-4.8] versus 2.8 [1.7-3.7] versus 2.8 [1.7-4.3] min, p = 0.68 and insertion pain VNRS mean {SD} 4.2 {2.5} versus 3.4 {2.3} versus 3.6 {2.2}, p = 0.26, insertion to delivery interval 26.0 {9.7} versus 25.6 {9.1} versus 22.8 {7.4} h, p = 0.45, and spontaneous vaginal delivery 20/43 (45%) versus 23/42(55%) versus 25/42(60%), p = 0.48 for 16F versus 22F versus 28F arms, respectively. Pairwise comparisons were not different.
CONCLUSION: Foley catheter 16F versus 22F versus 28F resulted in similar digital insertion performance in the dorsal recumbent position for unripe cervix labor induction.
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN21224268.
METHODS: An online questionnaire was circulated to different countries/cities in Asia-Oceania. The primary objective was to evaluate the coverage of HPV vaccination and cervical screening programs. The secondary objectives were to study the structures of these programs. Five case scenarios were set to understand how the respondents manage the abnormal screening results.
RESULTS: Fourteen respondents from 10 countries/cities had participated. Cervical cancer ranked the first in Myanmar and Nepal. About 10%-15% did not have national vaccination or screening program. The estimated coverage rate for vaccination and screening varied from less than 1% to 70%, which the coverage ran in parallel with the incidence and mortality rates of cervical cancer. All regions approved HPV vaccines, although only four provided free or subsidized programs for nonavalent vaccine. Cervical cytology remained the most common screening tool, and 20%-30% relied heavily on visual inspection using acetic acid. The screening age groups varied in different regions. From the case scenarios, it was noted that some respondents tended to offer more frequent screening tests or colposcopy than recommended by international guidelines.
CONCLUSION: This study revealed discrepancy in the practice of cervical cancer prevention in Asia-Oceania especially access to HPV vaccines. There is an urgent need for a global collaboration to eliminate cervical cancer by public education, reforming services, and medical training.