Nearly 70% of Colorado cannabis dispensaries contacted recommended cannabis products to treat nausea in the first trimester. Few dispensaries encouraged discussion with a health care provider without prompting. As cannabis legalization expands, policy and education efforts should involve dispensaries.

Routine pelvic examinations are the core of the periodic gynecological examination and widely tolerated as a necessary part of health maintenance. Is this examination beneficial for asymptomatic women? Justifications for the pelvic examination include screening for Chlamydia (or gonorrhea) infection, evaluation before initiation of hormonal contraception, screening for cervical cancer, and early detection of ovarian cancer. Current nucleic acid amplification tests for Chlamydia and gonorrhea permit the use of urine and self-administered vaginal swabs, which most women prefer over a pelvic examination. Pelvic examination findings do not affect the decision to prescribe or withhold systemic hormonal contraception; a pelvic examination is not needed to initiate these contraceptives. Recent American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) guidelines recommend less frequent cervical screening, thus decreasing the frequency of a speculum examination for cervical screening. Bimanual examinations for palpation of the uterus and ovaries are also routinely performed in the United States. Clinical trial data, however, show these examinations do not lead to earlier detection of ovarian cancer. No evidence identifies benefits of a pelvic examination in the early diagnosis of other conditions in the asymptomatic woman. Speculum and bimanual examinations are uncomfortable, disliked by many women, and use scarce time during a well woman visit. Eliminating the speculum examination from most visits and the bimanual examination from all visits of asymptomatic women will free resources to provide services of proven benefit. Overuse of the pelvic examination contributes to high healthcare costs without any compensatory health benefit.

Catholic health care facilities account for approximately one sixth of the U.S. health care market, have recently demonstrated successful growth, and serve as the only local hospital in certain remote locations. The Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Health Care Services is a set of guidelines created and revised by church leaders that applies the church's teaching, particularly as it relates to concern for human dignity, to modern-day medical practice; all Catholic health care facilities and providers within these facilities are required to abide. Strict interpretation of these directives limits family planning and most infertility services. Many women, however, do not anticipate differences to reproductive health care based on Catholic affiliation, and recent patient reports and legal enactments have highlighted the tension that arises when women are unable to receive medically indicated family planning services. In this article, I demonstrate that reproductive health care services are not consistently prohibited and that clinics often do not inform patients when scheduling appointments when restrictions exist. I highlight ethical concerns about patient autonomy as it relates to modern-day practice and recommend solutions including greater transparency and efforts to improve uniformity of practice at Catholic health care facilities.

No abstract

No abstract

OBJECTIVE: Given the rise in Catholic ownership of U.S. health care facilities, we aimed to examine reproductive health care provision and patient outcomes. We performed a scoping review, which maps the literature and considers inclusion of studies that are not specifically quantitative. DATA SOURCES: We searched five databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science and Cochrane Library, ClinialTrials.gov) from inception through August 2018 using terms related to reproductive health care and religion. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: We screened 2,906 studies. Articles were included if in English, included primary research data, and referenced U.S.-based Catholic facilities. We reviewed the reference lists of included articles. We excluded articles that addressed the relationship of patient or health care provider religion to provision of reproductive services, described reproductive health care services in non-Catholic facilities, or reported legal cases or concerns. Two independent reviewers screened all citations, a third reviewer resolved differences, and all three reviewers categorized included citations. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: We included 27 studies. Investigators most commonly focused on the provision of emergency contraception (n=9) or other contraceptive and sterilization methods (n=7); few focused on a range of family planning methods (n=3), natural family planning (n=2), ectopic pregnancy management (n=2), abortion care (n=2), miscarriage management (n=1), and infertility care (n=1). The most common study designs were cross-sectional (18/27 [67%]) and qualitative investigations (6/27 [22%]). Common data collection approaches included surveys, interviews, and mystery caller designs. Two studies involved authors with Catholic hospital affiliations and one of these reported patient outcomes; no other patient outcome reports were found. Studies cited restrictions to care in comparison with non-Catholic settings and multisite studies demonstrated variable rates of provision of reproductive health services across Catholic sites. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the significant proportion and recent growth of Catholic health care within the U.S. health care sector, little is known about reproductive health outcomes in these settings and in comparison with other settings.

Background Catholic hospitals operate under the Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Health Care Services, which for obstetrics and gynecology residents may create barriers to receiving adequate training in family planning.

No abstract