No abstract

In this review, the epidemiology, diagnosis, and treatment of pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) are discussed from a USA perspective and the difficulties that USA adolescents face in recognizing and seeking care for PID and other sexually transmitted infections (STIs) are emphasized. Females aged 15–24 years have the highest incidence of cervical infection with Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrheae, the principal causes of PID. PID is common in this age group. However, the incidence of PID in the USA is not known, because it is not a reportable disease, and because clinicians vary in the criteria used for the diagnosis. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommended the following diagnostic criteria that include lower abdominal or pelvic pain and at least one of the following: adnexal tenderness or cervical motion tenderness or uterine tenderness. Because PID can have serious sequelae, the criteria emphasize sensitivity (few false-negatives) at the expense of specificity (some false-positives). Patients who have PID are usually treated in the outpatient setting, following the CDC’s Guidelines for the Treatment of Sexually Transmitted Diseases 2015. They receive one dose of an intramuscular cephalosporin, together with 2 weeks of oral doxy cycline, and sometimes oral metronidazole. Improvement should usually be evident in 3 days. The USA does not offer comprehensive sex education for adolescents in public or private schools. Adolescents are unlikely to recognize the symptoms of PID and seek medical treatment. Confidentiality is important to adolescents, and low cost or free sources of confidential care are uncommon, making it unlikely that an adolescent would seek care even if she suspected an STI. The CDC has concluded that screening programs for chlamydia and gonorrhea infection help prevent PID; however, the lack of appropriate sources of care makes adolescents’ participation in screening programs unlikely.

Research has examined the safety, efficacy, feasibility, and cost-effectiveness of buprenorphine for the treatment of opioid dependence, but few studies have examined patient and provider experiences, especially in community health centers. Using de-identified electronic health record system (EHRS) data from 70 OCHIN community health centers (n = 1825), this cross-sectional analysis compared the demographics, comorbidities, and service utilization of patients receiving buprenorphine to those not receiving medication-assisted treatment (MAT). Compared to non-MAT patients, buprenorphine patients were younger and less likely to be Hispanic or live in poverty. Buprenorphine patients were less likely to have Medicaid insurance coverage, more likely to self-pay, and have private insurance coverage. Buprenorphine patients were less likely to have problem medical comorbidities or be coprescribed high-risk medications. It is important for providers, clinic administrators, and patients to understand the clinical application of medications for opioid dependence to ensure safe and effective care within safety net clinics.

No abstract

Because opioid overdose deaths in the United States continue to rise, it is critical to increase patient access to buprenorphine, which treats opioid use disorder and reduces mortality. An underrecognized barrier to buprenorphine treatment (both for maintenance and treatment of acute withdrawal) is limited access to buprenorphine monoproduct. In the United States, buprenorphine is primarily prescribed as a combination product also containing naloxone, added to reduce the potential for misuse. Because naloxone has relatively low sublingual bioavailability compared with buprenorphine, adverse effects are generally considered mild and rare. The authors' clinical experience, however, suggests that adverse effects may be less benign than generally accepted and can have negative effects for the patient, the provider-patient relationship, and the health care system as a whole. The insistence on prescribing combination product can foster stigma and mistrust, creating barriers to care and increased risk of overdose and death.