Contraceptive choices of women 35-44 years of age: findings from the behavioral risk factor surveillance system.

PURPOSE: With an estimated 3.1 million unintended pregnancies in the United States each year, patterns of contraceptive use have significant public health importance. Little literature has focused on these patterns in women over age 35. METHODS: Using data from the 2004 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, we conducted a population-based analysis of 22,890 women between the ages of 35-44 years who completed information on family planning. Lifestyle, demographic, and medical history covariates were assessed and multinomial logistic regression was used to obtain odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: Female sterilization was the most popular contraceptive method among women aged 35-44 years (28.5%). Relative to non-Hispanic white women, Hispanic and non-Hispanic black women were less likely to use effective methods of contraception such as male sterilization (OR = 0.33, 95% CI: 0.23, 0.46; and OR = 0.10, 95% CI: 0.06, 0.16, respectively) and oral contraceptives (OR = 0.55, 95% CI: 0.41, 0.73; and OR = 0.42, 95% CI: 0.31, 0.57, respectively) after adjustment for demographic, lifestyle, and medical factors. CONCLUSIONS: Although fecundity is reduced in women of this age group, increased rates of maternal and fetal complications make unintended pregnancies riskier. This study demonstrates opportunities for targeted counseling and increased awareness of the diversity of contraceptive choices for older women.

Attainment of goals from national guidelines among persons with type 2 diabetes: a cohort study in an academic family medicine setting.

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of mortality in patients with diabetes, but goals for reduction of modifable cardiovascular risk factors are difficult to achieve in primary care. We evaluated the change in risk factor control for a cohort of patients with diabetes and hyperlipidemia over a four-year period, as well as the change in proportion of patients meeting clinical practice guideline goals. METHODS: Medical records were reviewed from a cohort of 86 randomly selected persons with type 2 diabetes in an academic family medicine setting. Data were abstracted to assess the attainment of and change in five treatment goals related to glycemic, blood pressure, and lipid control from 1999-2003. Descriptive statistics were applied to demographic variables. Mean differences in outcomes were assessed with the paired t-test. The McNemar test was used to assess non-parametric variables, and the Wilcoxon signed ranks test was applied to differences achieved in mean goal scores for outcome variables. RESULT: The mean numbers of treatment goals attained were 2.76 (SD = 0.92) in 1999 and 2.48 (SD = 1.1) in 2003. Significant improvements were noted in the mean values of HbA1c (0.4% decrease, p = 0.03), diastolic blood pressure (4.3mmHg decrease, p < 0.001), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C; 10.6 mg/dL decrease, p < 0.01), and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C; 8.3 mg/dL increase, p < 0.001) over the four-year study interval. No significant differences were noted in the percent at goal during the study for HDL-C or for HbA1c. A significant decrease was found in the percent at goal from 1999-2003 for LDL-C from 79% to 40%, respectively). The decrease in the percent LDL-C at goal was explained by the more stringent practice guideline goals introduced in 2001 for diabetes (i.e., LDL-C < 100 mg/dL). CONCLUSION: Despite significant improvement in mean values of modifiable risk factors, the percent of patients meeting 2003 guideline goals for HbA1c, systolic blood pressure, and LDL cholesterol did not improve. These findings suggest that patient-level improvements may not be adequate indicators of a practices achievement of guideline recommendations. Percent attainment of guideline goals may be a useful peformance measure of practice-level quality improvement initiatives.

Regular use of aspirin and pancreatic cancer risk.

BACKGROUND: Regular use of aspirin and other non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) has been consistently associated with reduced risk of colorectal cancer and adenoma, and there is some evidence for a protective effect for other types of cancer. As experimental studies reveal a possible role for NSAIDs is reducing the risk of pancreatic cancer, epidemiological studies examining similar associations in human populations become more important. METHODS: In this hospital-based case-control study, 194 patients with pancreatic cancer were compared to 582 age and sex-matched patients with non-neoplastic conditions to examine the association between aspirin use and risk of pancreatic cancer. All participants received medical services at the Roswell Park Cancer Institute in Buffalo, NY and completed a comprehensive epidemiologic questionnaire that included information on demographics, lifestyle factors and medical history as well as frequency and duration of aspirin use. Patients using at least one tablet per week for at least six months were classified as regular aspirin users. Unconditional logistic regression was used to compute crude and adjusted odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Pancreatic cancer risk in aspirin users was not changed relative to non-users (adjusted OR = 1.00; 95% CI 0.72-1.39). No significant change in risk was found in relation to greater frequency or prolonged duration of use, in the total sample or in either gender. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that regular aspirin use may not be associated with lower risk of pancreatic cancer.