Social media utilization, preferences, and patterns of behavior in patients with gynecologic pelvic pain.

BACKGROUND: Social media is increasingly becoming a health resource for people suffering from complex and debilitating health conditions. A comprehensive understanding of how and why social media and the Internet are used among patients with chronic gynecologic pain will allow for the intentional development and incorporation of web-based tools into patient care plans. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine whether gynecologic patients with pain are more likely to use social media and the Internet to understand and manage their condition than those without pain. The survey was designed to explore how gynecologic patients with and without pain use and interact with social media and other web-based health resources and the clinical, personal, and demographic factors influencing these behaviors. STUDY DESIGN: Patients presenting with a new complaint to a gynecologist at 1 of 6 Fellowship in Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery-affiliated hospital systems were screened, consented, and assigned to pain and no-pain groups. Participants were surveyed about social media and Internet use, symptoms, bother, physician selection, motivation, trust, and demographic information. Survey responses were compared using the Fisher exact tests, odds ratios, and risk ratios from standard tabular analysis, univariate or multivariate tests of means, and regression analyses, as appropriate. RESULTS: Of 517 participants included in the study, 475 (92%) completed the survey, 328 (69.1%) with pain and 147 (30.9%) without pain. Study participants in the pain group reported more than double the odds of using social media than those without pain (37.8% vs 19.7%; odds ratio, 2.47; 95% confidence interval, 1.54-3.96) and triple the odds of using the Internet (88.4% vs 69.4%; odds ratio, 3.37; 95% confidence, 2.04-5.56) to understand or manage their condition. Participants with pain were more likely than those without pain to engage in social media at a higher level (3.5 vs 1.7 on a scale of 0 to 10; P<.0001), be motivated by interpersonal elements of online engagement (Hotelling's T2=37.3; P<.0001), prefer an interactive component to their online health resource (35.6% vs 24.3%; risk ratio, 1.46; 95% confidence interval, 1.00-2.20; P=.0433), be influenced by others in their choice of a gynecologist (0.37 vs 0.32 on a scale of 0 to 1; P=.009), use social media as a coping tool (38.3% vs 17%; P=.0001), trust information found on social media (31.4% vs 16.7%; P=.0033), and trust other women with the same condition, informal health resources, and personal sources more and doctors and formal health resources less (P=.0083). Participants in both groups reported higher levels of social media engagement with higher levels of symptom bother (28% increase in engagement with every doubling of bother level (P<.0001). CONCLUSION: Patients with gynecologic pain were more likely than those without pain to use social media and the Internet to understand and manage their condition. Patients with pain engaged in and trusted social media at a higher level, with engagement rising directly with bother level.

Informed consent in gynecologic surgery.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Informed consent is frequently used interchangeably with obtaining a signature on a form. This oversimplification shifts the value from the process of informed consent to the documentation. This review focuses on the recommended components of the consent process, barriers encountered, factors influencing patient satisfaction, attempts to improve the consent practice, and considerations in special populations. RECENT FINDINGS: The process of informed consent is key to promoting shared decision-making and patient autonomy. Several barriers exist to providing optimal consent including time constraints as well as educational, cultural, and language barriers. Innovative approaches such as audiovisual aids show promise in overcoming barriers and improving the consent process. SUMMARY: Patients seek expertise and knowledge to aid in making decisions that align with their care goals. Providers have an obligation to provide individualized and accessible counseling. Ongoing research is needed to optimize this process.

Guidelines for Monitoring Patients Using Opioid Therapy.

Opioid-related morbidity and mortality have increased to epidemic proportions over the past 20 years. Gynecologists play an integral role in addressing this epidemic through management of patients with pain, specifically through prescribing and monitoring practices. Practical recommendations are provided for clinicians caring for noncancer patients on chronic opioid therapy. Recommendations are largely based on national consensus guidelines with a focus on frequency and content of follow-up, identification of high risk behaviors, and reassessment of goals of treatment.

Pregnancy intention screening tools: a randomized trial to assess perceived helpfulness with communication about reproductive goals.

BACKGROUND: Federal and clinical guidelines support integration of reproductive life planning in the care of female patients to aid in the reduction of unplanned pregnancies. A multitude of tools have been created to help in the counseling component, but further research is needed regarding how and whether they facilitate patient-provider communication. RESEARCH: We performed a randomized controlled trial to evaluate if patients report whether a detailed or simple pregnancy intention screening tool is helpful for communication of reproductive life plans. We compared a novel reproductive counseling aid, the Family Planning Quotient (FPQ), to a simple tool based on the One Key Question® (OKQ). Providers also evaluated whether they thought the tool used at the visit was helpful. We randomized 93 patients to complete a survey including identical demographic questions and either the FPQ or OKQ reproductive counseling tool. We did not provide further instructions to either the patient or provider. Following the visits, we collected 84 subject evaluations and 79 provider evaluations. A similar proportion of subjects using either reproductive counseling tool found it helpful in communicating their reproductive life plans to their providers (approximately 66%), but there was no difference between the two tools studied. Less than half of providers reported that the FPQ tool was helpful (FPQ: 16/43, 37.2% versus OKQ: 18/36, 50%; p = 0.25). CONCLUSION: Two-thirds of patients reported either a detailed or simple reproductive plan screening tool was helpful to facilitate communication with their provider, but only half of providers found either tool helpful. Use of reproductive screening tools should be followed by patient-centered counseling to help patients meet their reproductive life goals.