Anogenital Distance and Endometriosis: Results of a Case-Control Study.

AGD is the distance measured from the anus to the genital tubercle. Recent evidence suggests that a shorter AGD, a sensitive biomarker of the prenatal hormonal environment, could be associated with higher endometriosis risk. However, studies investigating AGD in affected women are scanty. We have set up a case-control study recruiting nulliparous women (aged 18-40 years) with endometriosis between 2017 and 2018. Cases were 90 women with a surgical or with a current nonsurgical diagnosis of endometriosis (n = 45 deep infiltrating endometriosis (DIE), and n = 45 ovarian endometrioma (OMA)). Controls were 45 asymptomatic women referring for periodical gynaecological care and without a previous diagnosis of endometriosis. They were matched to cases for age and BMI. For each woman, two measures were obtained using a digital calliper: AGDAC, from the clitoral surface to the upper verge of the anus, and AGDAF, from the posterior fourchette to the upper verge of the anus. Each distance was derived from the mean of six measurements acquired from two different gynaecologists. The mean ± SD AGDAC in women with DIE, OMA and without a diagnosis of endometriosis was 76.0 ± 12.1, 76.1 ± 11.1 and 77.8 ± 11.4 mm, respectively (p = 0.55). The mean ± SD AGDAF in women with DIE, OMA and without a diagnosis of endometriosis was 22.8 ± 5.0, 21.7 ± 9.0 and 23.7 ± 7.8 mm, respectively (p = 0.38). Our study failed to find an association between AGD and the presence of endometriosis. AGD does not seem to represent a reliable indicator of the presence of endometriosis to be used in clinical practice.

Sleep disturbances, fatigue and psychological health in women with endometriosis: a matched pair case-control study.

RESEARCH QUESTION: What are the associations between endometriosis, pelvic pain symptoms, fatigue and sleep? Psychological health and quality of life in endometriosis patients with good versus bad quality of sleep were also examined. DESIGN: This matched pair case-control study included 123 consecutive endometriosis patients and 123 women without a history of endometriosis (matched to patients for age and body mass index). Endometriosis-related pelvic pain severity was rated on a 0-10 numerical rating scale. Fatigue was measured on a 1-5 Likert scale. Women also completed a set of self-report questionnaires for assessing sleep disturbances (Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index, Epworth Sleepiness Scale, Insomnia Severity Index), psychological health (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale) and quality of life (Short Form-12). RESULTS: Painful endometriosis had an impact on fatigue (P = 0.006; η2p = 0.041) and sleep (P < 0.001; η2p = 0.051). Women with painful endometriosis reported significantly greater fatigue, poorer quality of sleep, higher daytime sleepiness and more severe insomnia than women without significant pain symptoms and controls. Poorer quality of sleep among endometriosis patients was associated with greater fatigue (P < 0.001; η2p = 0.130), poorer psychological health (P < 0.001; η2p = 0.135), and lower quality of life (P < 0.001; η2p = 0.240). CONCLUSIONS: Pelvic pain (rather than endometriosis in itself) is associated with fatigue and sleep disturbances, with poor sleep having a detrimental impact on women's psychological health and quality of life.

Preliminary insights on the relation between endometriosis, pelvic pain, and employment.

AIMS: The economic burden of endometriosis and pelvic pain involves direct and indirect healthcare costs due to work loss and decreased productivity. However, the relation between endometriosis, pelvic pain, and employment remains underinvestigated. This study aimed at providing preliminary insights into this topic. METHODS: We compared the employment status (having vs. not having a job) in 298 consecutive endometriosis patients and in 332 women without a history of endometriosis (control group). We also examined the association between pelvic pain and employment status. RESULTS: Women with endometriosis were less likely to be employed compared to women without endometriosis (OR 0.508; 95% CI 0.284-0.908; p = 0.022). Women with symptomatic endometriosis were less likely to be employed relative to controls (OR 0.345; 95% CI 0.184-0.650; p = 0.001), as well as to asymptomatic endometriosis patients (OR 0.362; 95% CI 0.167-0.785; p = 0.01). No significant differences emerged between asymptomatic endometriosis and the control group (p > 0.05). Greater severity of dysmenorrhea, dyspareunia, chronic pelvic pain, and dyschezia was found in unemployed endometriosis patients (vs. employed endometriosis participants). CONCLUSION: Endometriosis symptoms may significantly affect women's professional life, with important socioeconomic, legal, and political implications. Community-based participatory research is encouraged.

A stepped-care approach to symptomatic endometriosis management: a participatory research initiative.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the proportion of patients with symptomatic endometriosis satisfied with their medical treatment 12 months after enrollment in a stepped-care management protocol. DESIGN: Prospective, single-arm, self-controlled study. SETTING: Academic department. PATIENT(S): A cohort of 157 consecutive patients referred or self-referred to our center for symptomatic endometriosis. INTERVENTIONS(S): Systematic detailed information process on medical and surgical treatment followed by a shared decision to start a stepped-care protocol including three subsequent medical therapy steps (oral contraception [OC]; 2.5 mg/d norethindrone acetate [NETA]; 2 mg/d dienogest [DNG]) and a fourth surgical step. Stepping up was triggered by drug inefficacy/intolerance. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Satisfaction with treatment was assessed according to a five-category scale (very satisfied, satisfied, neither satisfied nor dissatisfied, dissatisfied, very dissatisfied). Variations were measured in pain symptoms with the use of a 0-10-point numeric rating scale (NRS), in quality of life with the use of the Short Form 12 questionnaire (SF-12), and in sexual functioning with the use of the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI). RESULT(S): At the end of the 12-month study period, 106 women were still using OC, 23 were using NETA, three were using DNG, and four had undergone surgery. Twenty-one participants (13%) dropped out from the study. In intention-to-treat analysis, excluding five drop-outs for pregnancy desire, the overall satisfaction rate with the stepped-care protocol was 62% (95/152; 95% CI 55%-70%). By 12-month follow-up, significant improvements were observed in all pain symptom scores and in SF-12 physical and mental component summary scores, whereas FSFI scores did not vary substantially. CONCLUSION(S): Most women with endometriosis-associated pelvic pain who chose a stepped-care approach were satisfied with OC and a low-cost progestin for the treatment of their symptoms. The need to step up to an expensive progestin or surgery was marginal.

Shifting from Oral Contraceptives to Norethisterone Acetate, or Vice Versa, because of Drug Intolerance: Does the Change Benefit Women with Endometriosis?

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Oral contraceptives (OC) and norethisterone acetate (NETA) are among first-line medical therapies for symptomatic endometriosis, but their use is sometimes associated with intolerable side effects. We investigated whether shifting from low-dose OC to NETA (2.5 mg/day), or vice versa, improved tolerability. METHODS: Sixty-seven women willing to discontinue their treatment because of intolerable side effects despite good pain relief, were enrolled in a self-controlled study, and shifted from OC to NETA (n = 35) or from NETA to OC (n = 32). The main study outcome was satisfaction with treatment 12 months after the change. Tolerability, pain symptoms, health-related quality of life, psychological status, and sexual functioning were also evaluated. RESULTS: After treatment change, good tolerability was reported by 37% of participants who shifted to NETA, and by 52% of those who shifted to OC. At 12-month assessment, 51% of women intolerant to OC were satisfied with NETA, and 65% of those intolerant to NETA were satisfied with OC (intention-to-treat analysis). Other study variables did not vary substantially. CONCLUSIONS: In selected endometriosis patients, shifting from OC to NETA, or vice versa, because of side effects, improved tolerability. Better results were observed when substituting NETA with OC rather than the other way round.

Is Shifting to a Progestin Worthwhile When Estrogen-Progestins Are Inefficacious for Endometriosis-Associated Pain?

The purpose of this study was to assess the proportion of patients satisfied with their treatment after a change from a low-dose oral contraceptive (OC) to norethisterone acetate (NETA) because of inefficacy of OC on pain symptoms. To this end, prospective, self-controlled study was conducted on 153 women using OC as a treatment for endometriosis and with persistence of one or more moderate or severe pain symptoms. At baseline and during 12 months after a shift from OC to oral NETA, 2.5 mg/d, pelvic pain was measured by means of a 0- to 10-point numerical rating scale and a multidimensional categorical rating scale. Variations in health-related quality of life, psychological status, and sexual function were also evaluated with validated scales. At the end of the study period, participants indicated the degree of satisfaction with their treatment according to a 5-degree scale from very satisfied to very dissatisfied. A total of 28 women dropped out of the study, the main reason was intolerable side effects (n = 15). At 12-month assessment, 70% of participants were very satisfied or satisfied with NETA treatment (intention-to-treat analysis). Statistically significant improvements were observed in health-related quality of life, psychological status, and sexual function. At per-protocol analysis, almost half of the patients (58/125) reported suboptimal drug tolerability. However, complaints were not severe enough to cause dissatisfaction, drug discontinuation, or request for surgery. These encouraging results could be used to counsel women with symptomatic endometriosis not responding to OC and to inform their decisions on modifications of disease management.

The complex interface between economy and healthcare: An introductory overview for clinicians.

In a period of generalized economic crisis, it seems particularly appropriate to try to manage a continuing growing sector such as healthcare in the best possible way. The crucial aim of optimization of available healthcare resources is obtaining the maximum possible benefit with the minimum expenditure. This has important social implications, whether individual citizens or tax-funded national health services eventually have to pay the bill. The keyword here is efficiency, which means either, maximizing the benefit from a fixed sum of money, or minimizing the resources required for a defined benefit. In order to achieve these objectives, economic evaluation is a helpful tool. Five different types of economic evaluation exist in the health-care field: cost-minimization, cost-benefit, cost-consequences, cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analysis. The objective of this narrative review is to provide an overview of the principal methods used for economic evaluation in healthcare. Economic evaluation represents a starting point for the allocation of resources, the decision of the valuable investments and the division of budgets across different health programs. Moreover, economic evaluation allows the comparison of different procedures in terms of quality of life and life expectancy, bearing in mind that cost-effectiveness is only one of multiple facets in the decision making-process. Economic evaluation is important to critically evaluate clinical interventions and ensure that we are implementing the most cost-effective management protocols. Clinicians are called to fulfill the complex task of optimizing the use of resources, and, at the same time, improving the quality of healthcare assistance.