Search

AimsThis study assessed gender differences in a debilitating urologic pain condition, interstitial cystitis/bladder pain syndrome (IC/BPS). We aimed to (1) evaluate how pain, symptom, and distress profiles of IC/BPS may differ between genders and (2) obtain in-depth firsthand accounts from patients to provide additional insight into their experiences that may explain potential gender differences.MethodsA mixed methods approach combined validated patient-reported outcome measures with a single timepoint 90-min focus group. Tests of summary score group differences between men and women were assessed across questionnaires measuring urologic symptoms, pain, emotional functioning, and diagnostic timeline. Qualitative analysis applied an inductive-deductive approach to evaluate and compare experiences of living with IC/BPS Group narratives were coded and evaluated thematically by gender using the biopsychosocial model, providing insight into the different context of biopsychosocial domains characterizing the male and female experience of IC/BPS.ResultsThirty-seven participants [women (n = 27) and men (n = 10)] completed measures and structured focus group interviews across eight group cohorts conducted from 8/2017 to 3/2019. Women reported greater pain intensity (p = 0.043) and extent (p = 0.018), but not significantly greater impairment from pain (p = 0.160). Levels of psychological distress were significantly elevated across both genders. Further, the duration between time of pain symptom onset and time to diagnosis was significantly greater for women than men (p = 0.012). Qualitative findings demonstrated key distinctions in experiences between genders. Men appeared not to recognize or to deter emotional distress while women felt overwhelmed by it. Men emphasized needing more physiological treatment options whilst women emphasized needing more social and emotional support. Interactions with medical providers and the healthcare system differed substantially between genders. While men reported feeling supported and involved in treatment decisions, women reported feeling dismissed and disbelieved.ConclusionThe findings indicate different pain experiences and treatment needs between genders in persons experiencing urologic pain and urinary symptoms, with potential intervention implications. Results suggest gender health inequality in medical interactions in this urologic population needing further investigation.

Background: Interstitial cystitis/bladder pain syndrome (IC/BPS) is a debilitating condition carrying substantial psychosocial burden. Psychological treatment for IC/BPS is little studied, and there are barriers to its use in clinical management. Whether psychological treatments benefit patients with IC/BPS is unclear and we do not know whether such treatments would meet patient needs. Aims: Incorporating patient-reported needs and acknowledging diversity in pain experiences can inform patient-centered interventions for IC/BPS. This project characterized the experience of living with IC/BPS and patient perceptions of needs in its treatment, with the goal of informing patient-centered treatment for IC/BPS. Methods: Using both quantitative and qualitative methods, 27 females with IC/BPS participated in a focus group and completed validated self-report assessments evaluating urinary symptoms, pain, and emotional functioning. Focus groups were audio recorded and transcribed and then coded and analyzed using an iterative inductive/deductive approach. Linear regression models evaluated the relationship between psychological functioning and symptom severity. Results: We conducted six focus groups between August and December 2017. Five major themes emerged from qualitative analysis: managing physical symptoms, emotional symptoms, impact on daily life and socio-contextual factors, responding to illness, and addressing needs in treatment. The physiological and emotional consequences of IC/BPS were reported, highlighting their impact on interpersonal relationships and challenges in obtaining appropriate treatment for IC/BPS. Quantitative analysis showed that depression levels were significantly associated with worsened IC/BPS symptomology, after controlling for known confounding factors. Conclusion: Individuals with IC/BPS could benefit from tailored psychological interventions focusing on pain management, emotion regulation, communications skills, along with sexual dysfunction and intimacy fears.

Abstract. Psychologically informed physical therapy (PIPT) blends psychological strategies within a physical therapist's treatment approach for the prevention and management of chronic musculoskeletal pain. Several randomized trials have been conducted examining the efficacy of PIPT compared to standard physical therapy on important patient-reported outcomes of disability, physical function, and pain. In this review, we examine recent trials published since 2012 to describe current PIPT methods, discuss implications from findings, and offer future directions. Twenty-two studies, representing 18 trials, were identified. The studied PIPT interventions included (1) graded activity or graded exposure (n = 6), (2) cognitive-behavioral-based physical therapy (n = 9), (3) acceptance and commitment-based physical therapy (n = 1), and (4) internet-based psychological programs with physical therapy (n = 2). Consistent with prior reviews, graded activity is not superior to other forms of physical activity or exercise. In a few recent studies, cognitive-behavioral-based physical therapy had short-term efficacy when compared to a program of standardized exercise. There is a need to further examine approaches integrating alternative strategies including acceptance-based therapies (ie, acceptance and commitment therapy or mindfulness) or internet-based cognitive-behavioral programs within physical therapy. Although PIPT remains a promising care model, more convincing evidence is needed to support widespread adoption, especially in light of training demands and implementation challenges.

In the United States, suicide increased by 24% in the past 20 years, and suicide risk identification at point-of-care remains a cornerstone of the effort to curb this epidemic (1). As risk identification is difficult because of symptom under-reporting, timing, or lack of screening, healthcare systems rely increasingly on risk scoring and now artificial intelligence (AI) to assess risk. AI remains the science of solving problems and accomplishing tasks, through automated or computational means, that normally require human intelligence. This science is decades-old and includes traditional predictive statistics and machine learning. Only in the last few years has it been applied rigorously in suicide risk prediction and prevention. Applying AI in this context raises significant ethical concern, particularly in balancing beneficence and respecting personal autonomy. To navigate the ethical issues raised by suicide risk prediction, we provide recommendations in three areas—communication, consent, and controls—for both providers and researchers (2).