Conceptual anatomy of the female genitalia using text mining and implications for patient care.

This article analyses the conceptual histories of words associated with female genital parts to explore how they may affect the lived experience of people with these parts and the quality of gynaecological care they receive. Specifically, we examine the implications of using the word 'vagina' to replace the word 'vulva', or indeed to indicate the entire female genitalia. This article does so through an analysis of existing scholarly work and through text mining methods such as word frequencies, most distinctive word collocates and word-embeddings drawn from literary and women's magazine corpora. We find that words indicating specific female genital parts are very infrequently mentioned in our corpora, which shows that there is a troubling lack of exposure and education in our socio-cultural context when it comes to the female genital anatomy. When they are mentioned, their usage reflects historical and patriarchal associations that have been primarily attached to the word 'vagina'. When it comes to the 'vagina' and 'vulva', the penis is the most prevalent association by far; whereas the most commonly occurring female genital parts are parts to do with reproduction-reinforcing a long-standing and disproportionate emphasis on the female genitalia's reproductive function. Our research also reveals a concerning emphasis on non-evidence-based female hygiene products, thus perpetuating the damaging stereotype of the dirty vagina. These findings may explain many negative patient outcomes such as stigma attached to seeking out timely gynaecological care, lack of informed medical consent and non-evidence-based practices exacerbated by problematic cultural depictions of the female genitalia. They can also explain the neglect of female sexual agency, pleasure and well-being. Understanding historical and contemporary usages of words for the female genitalia has important implications for the quality of patient care today and is a critical component of gender and reproductive justice.

Factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and hesitancy among residents of Northern California jails.

Carceral facilities are high-risk settings for COVID-19 transmission. Factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and hesitancy among incarcerated individuals are poorly understood, especially among jail residents. Here, we conducted a retrospective review of electronic health record (EHR) data on COVID-19 vaccine uptake in custody and additionally administered a survey to assess reasons for vaccine hesitancy, sources of COVID-19 information, and medical mistrust among residents of four Northern California jails. We performed multivariate logistic regression to determine associations with vaccine acceptance. Of 2,564 jail residents offered a COVID-19 vaccine between March 19, 2021 and June 30, 2021, 1,441 (56.2%) accepted at least one dose. Among vaccinated residents, 497 (34.5%) had initially refused. Vaccine uptake was higher among older individuals, women, those with recent flu vaccination, and those living in shared housing. Among 509 survey respondents, leading reasons for vaccine hesitancy were concerns around side effects and suboptimal efficacy, with cost and the need for an annual booster being other hypothetical deterrents to vaccination. Vaccine hesitancy was also associated with mistrust of medical personnel in and out of jail, although this association varied by race/ethnicity. Television and friends/family were the most common and most trusted sources of COVID-19 information, respectively. Overall, vaccine acceptance was much lower among jail residents than the local and national general population. Interventions to increase vaccination rates in this setting should utilize accessible and trusted sources of information to address concerns about side effects and efficacy, while working to mitigate medical and institutional mistrust among residents.

Differential Diagnosis of a Unique Vulvar Mass in an Adolescent.

BACKGROUND: Vulvar masses in adolescents have a broad differential diagnosis, yet few reports exist detailing masses of mammary origin. CASE: A nulliparous, healthy 16-year-old adolescent presented with a longstanding, ulcerated, 17-cm vulvar mass of unknown origin and pronounced inguinal lymphadenopathy. The patient underwent a left radical partial vulvectomy, with pathology revealing terminal duct lobular units consistent with polymastia. CONCLUSION: Differential diagnosis of a vulvar mass in an adolescent should include polymastia.

Trauma-informed abortion care.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: People seeking reproductive care experience trauma on many levels including personal, structural, in medical care, and in barriers to care. This article reviews key aspects of a Trauma-Informed Care approach in abortion and reproductive healthcare. RECENT FINDINGS: Experiences of trauma are common and compounding, including systemic trauma, such as racism, sexism, and transphobia. Reproductive healthcare itself traumatizes and re-traumatizes. Trauma Informed Care (TIC) approach to individual abortion care includes maximize patient safety, choice, and privacy. TIC approach to systemic abortion care includes dismantling barriers to care and stigma. SUMMARY: The experience of trauma is prevalent, often unrecognized and can be multifactorial, especially for those seeking abortion and contraception care. Reproductive care can create situations or power dynamics that reactivate a trauma experience. History of trauma influences a person's health, relationships, experience, and use of reproductive healthcare, as well as trust in reproductive health recommendations. Laws restricting access to abortion and reproductive health add another layer of trauma and disproportionately affect marginalized groups. Guidelines for Trauma Informed Abortion Care recognize the complexity of trauma in reproductive health experiences and seek to promote safety, empowerment, and healing on individual and systemic levels.

Impact of policy-based and institutional interventions on postoperative opioid prescribing practices.

BACKGROUND: We assessed the impact of policy-based and institutional interventions to limit postoperative opioid prescribing. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent laparoscopic/open appendectomies, laparoscopic/open cholecystectomies, and laparoscopic/open inguinal hernia repair during a 6-month interval in 2018 (control), 2019 (post-policy intervention), and 2020 (post-institutional intervention) to assess changes in postoperative opioid prescribing patterns. A survey was collected for the 2020 cohort. RESULTS: Comparing the 762 patients identified in 2018, 2019, and 2020 cohorts there was a significant decrease in mean opioid tabs prescribed (23.5 ± 8.9 vs. 16.2 ± 7.0 vs. 12.8 ± 4.9, p < 0.01) and mean OME dosage (148.0 ± 68.0 vs. 108.6 ± 51.8 vs. 95.4 ± 38.0, p < 0.01), without a difference in refill requests. Patient survey (response rate 63%) indicated 91.4% of patients reported sufficient pain control. CONCLUSION: Formalized opioid-prescribing guidelines and statewide regulations can significantly decrease postoperative opioid prescribing with good patient satisfaction. Surgeon education may facilitate efforts to minimize narcotic over-prescription without compromising pain management.

Tobacco litter costs and public policy: a framework and methodology for considering the use of fees to offset abatement costs.

OBJECTIVES: Growing concern over the costs, environmental impact and safety of tobacco product litter (TPL) has prompted states and cities to undertake a variety of policy initiatives, of which litter abatement fees are part. The present work describes a framework and methodology for calculating TPL costs and abatement fees. METHODS: Abatement is associated with four categories of costs: (1) mechanical and manual abatement from streets, sidewalks and public places, (2) mechanical and manual abatement from storm water and sewer treatment systems, (3) the costs associated with harm to the ecosystem and harm to industries dependent on clean and healthy ecosystems, and (4) the costs associated with direct harm to human health. The experiences of the City of San Francisco's recently proposed tobacco litter abatement fee serve as a case study. RESULTS: City and municipal TPL costs are incurred through manual and mechanical clean-up of surfaces and catchment areas. According to some studies, public litter abatement costs to US cities range from US$3 million to US$16 million. TPL typically comprises between 22% and 36% of all visible litter, implying that total public TPL direct abatement costs range from about US$0.5 million to US$6 million for a city the size of San Francisco. The costs of mitigating the negative externalities of TPL in a city the size of San Francisco can be offset by implementing a fee of approximately US$0.20 per pack. CONCLUSIONS: Tobacco litter abatement costs to cities can be substantial, even when the costs of potential environmental pollution and tourism effects are excluded. One public policy option to address tobacco litter is levying of fees on cigarettes sold. The methodology described here for calculating TPL costs and abatement fees may be useful to state and local authorities who are considering adoption of this policy initiative.