Polyvictimization and Psychiatric Sequelae Associated with Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting (FGM/C)

Female Genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C) is associated with enduring psychiatric complications. In this study, we investigate the rates of co-morbid abuses and polyvictimization experienced by survivors of FGM/C. This is a sub-analysis of a cohort study examining the patient population at the EMPOWER Center for Survivors of Sex Trafficking and Sexual Violence in New York City. A retrospective chart-review of electronic medical records was conducted for all consenting adult patients who had FGM/C and had an intake visit between January 16, 2014 and March 6, 2020. Of the 80 participants, ages ranged from 20 to 62 years with a mean of 37.4 (SD?=?9.1) years. In addition to FGM/C, participants were victims of physical abuse (43; 53.8%), emotional abuse (35; 43.8%), sexual abuse (35; 43.8%), forced marriage (20; 25%), child marriage (13; 16.3%), and sex trafficking (1; 1.4%). There was a high degree of polyvictimization, with 41 (51.2%) experiencing 3 or more of the aforementioned abuses. Having FGM/C on or after age 13 or having a higher total abuse score was also found to be strong predictors of depression and PTSD. The high rates of polyvictimization among survivors of FGM/C are associated with development of depression and PTSD. Despite co-morbid abuses, patients still attribute substantial psychiatric symptoms to their FGM/C. Health care providers should understand the high risk of polyvictimization when caring for this patient population.

     

Orientation and mobility outcome measures

Despite orientation and mobility (O&M) being a significant factor determining quality of life of people with low vision or blindness, there are no gold standard measures or agreement on how to measure O&M performance. In the first part of this systematic review, an inventory of O&M outcome measures used by recent studies to assess the performance of orientation and/or mobility of adults with vision impairment (low vision and blindness) is presented. A wide variety of O&M outcome measures have been implemented in different fields of study, such as epidemiologic research and interventional studies evaluating training, assistive technology, vision rehabilitation and vision restoration. The most frequent aspect of outcome measures is efficiency such as time, distance, speed and percentage of preferred walking speed, followed by obstacle contacts and avoidance, and dis/orientation and veering. Other less commonly used aspects are target identification, safety and social interaction and self-reported outcome measures. Some studies employ sophisticated equipment to capture and analyse O&M performance in a laboratory setting, while others carry out their assessment in real-world indoor or outdoor environments. In the second part of this review, the appropriateness of implementing the identified outcome measures to assess O&M performance in clinical and functional O&M practice is evaluated. Nearly a half of these outcome measures meet all four criteria of face validity (either clinical or functional), responsiveness, reliability and feasibility and have the potential to be implemented in clinical or functional O&M practice. The findings of this review confirm the complicated and dynamic nature of O&M. Multiple measures are required in any evaluation of O&M performance to facilitate holistic assessment of O&M abilities and limitations of each individual.     

Intervention for arch obstruction after the Norwood procedure: Prevalence,associated factors,and practice variability

Objective

Arch obstruction after the Norwood procedure is common and contributes to mortality. We determined the prevalence, associated factors, and practice variability of arch reintervention and assessed whether arch reintervention is associated with mortality.

Factors influencing choice of medical vs. surgical treatment of pediatric appendicitis

PurposeTo examine what proportion of caregivers, if given a choice, would choose medical versus surgical treatment of appendicitis and what factors would be important in their decision.MethodsA survey was devised and given to the caregivers of children presenting to the pediatrician for a routine visit in community and academic pediatric clinics. The survey presented a summary of outcomes after medical (non-operative) and surgical treatment of uncomplicated appendicitis. Participants were then asked to choose medical versus surgical treatment if their child were to develop appendicitis. They were also asked to rate the importance of certain factors in their decision ? 1 being “not important” and 5 being “very important”.ResultsFour hundred surveys were distributed with an 86.2% (345/400) response rate. Six percent (21/342) of respondents reported a history of appendicitis and 49.4% (168/340) reported having known someone who had appendicitis. The majority of respondents, 85.3% (284/333), were mothers. A minority of respondents, 41.7% (95% CI: 36.7, 47.0), chose medical treatment over surgery for appendicitis. There was no statistical difference in the proportion of mothers (41.6%) versus fathers who chose medical treatment (41.3%). Caregivers who chose medical treatment were more likely to rate time in hospital (p = .008) and time out of school (p = 05) as important in decision making when compared with those who chose surgery. Those who chose surgical treatment were more likely to rate risk of recurrent appendicitis (p < .001) as important to decision making. In the multivariate analysis, those who rated time in hospital as very important had more than twice the odds of choosing medical therapy (OR 2.20, p = 0.02) when compared with those who rated it as less important. Not knowing someone who has had appendicitis was significantly associated with choosing medical therapy when compared with those who do know someone who has had appendicitis, OR 2.3, p = .002. Rating pain as very important was also significantly associated with choosing medical therapy, when compared to those rating pain 1–3, OR 3.38, p = .03.ConclusionsIn this survey of caregivers of children presenting for routine care, 41.7% would choose medical, or non-operative, therapy for their children with acute appendicitis. The risk of recurrence, time in hospital, and time out of school, pain, and knowing someone who has had appendicitis were all important factors that families may consider when making a decision. These data may be useful for surgeons counseling patients on which treatment to pursue.     

Treatment sequence network meta-analysis in Crohn’s disease: a methodological case study

Objective: Several biologic therapies are available for the treatment of mild-to-moderate Crohn’s disease (CD). This network meta-analysis (NMA) aimed to assess the comparative efficacy of ustekinumab, adalimumab, vedolizumab and infliximab in the maintenance of clinical response and remission after 1?year of treatment.

Methods: A systematic literature search was performed to identify relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Key outcomes of interest were clinical response (CD activity index [CDAI] reduction of 100 points; CDAI-100) and remission (CDAI score under 150 points; CDAI < 150). A treatment sequence Bayesian NMA was conducted to account for the re-randomization of patients based on different clinical definitions, the lack of similarity of the common comparator for each trial and the full treatment pathway from the induction phase onwards.

Results: Thirteen RCTs were identified. Ustekinumab 90?mg q8w was associated with statistically significant improvement in clinical response relative to placebo and vedolizumab 300?mg. For clinical remission, ustekinumab 90?mg q8w was associated with statistically significant improvement relative to placebo and vedolizumab 300?mg q8w. Findings from sub-population analyses had similar results but were not statistically significant.

Conclusions: The NMA suggest that ustekinumab is associated with the highest likelihood of reaching response or remission at 1?year compared with placebo, adalimumab and vedolizumab. Results should be interpreted with caution because this is a novel methodology; however, the treatment sequence analysis may be the most methodologically sound analysis to derive estimates of comparative efficacy in CD in the absence of head-to-head evidence.