Search

Background: A prospective study was conducted to evaluate the impact of an educational reproductive health program on medical student peer educators and the secondary school pupils whom they taught. Methods: The Marseille School of Medicine and ten public secondary schools participated in the study. Medical students were recruited and trained as peer educators to promote sexual health in the secondary schools. The medical students and secondary school pupils were evaluated before and after education program. The main outcome measure was the sexual health knowledge score on a 20-item questionnaire (maximum score 20). Results: A total of 3350 students attended the peer-led course conducted by 107 medical students. The medical students' score increased significantly before and after the course (from 15.2 ± 1.8 to 18.3 ± 0.9; p < 0.001). The knowledge score of the pupils increased (from 7.8 ± 4 to 13.5 ± 4.4; p < 0.001). The girls' score was significantly higher than the boys' score after the course, but not before (14.5 ± 3.3 vs 12.5 ± 4.6; p < 0.001). Prior to the course, the score among the female medical students was significantly higher than that of the males. The overall knowledge increase was not significantly different between medical students and secondary school pupils (mean 3.1 ± 1 and 5.7 ± 4 respectively; p > 0.05). Conclusions: The program was effective in increasing the knowledge of medical students as well as secondary school pupils. Male sexual health knowledge should be reinforced. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Little is known about depressed patients' profiles and how they are managed. The aim of the study is to compare GPs and psychiatrists for 1°) sociodemographic and clinical profile of their patients considered as depressed 2°) patterns of care provision. Methods: The study design is an observational cross-sectional study on a random sample of GPs and psychiatrists working in France. Consecutive inclusion of patients seen in consultation considered as depressed by the physician. GPs enrolled 6,104 and psychiatrists 1,433 patients. Data collected: sociodemographics, psychiatric profile, environmental risk factors of depression and treatment. All clinical data were collected by participating physicians; there was no direct independent clinical assessment of patients to check the diagnosis of depressive disorder. Results: Compared to patients identified as depressed by GPs, those dentified by psychiatrists were younger, more often urban (10.5% v 5.4% - OR = 2.4), educated (42.4% v 25.4% - OR = 3.9), met DSM-IV criteria for depression (94.6% v 85.6% - OR = 2.9), had been hospitalized for depression (26.1% v 15.6% - OR = 2.0) and were younger at onset of depressive problems (all adjusted p < .001). No difference was found for psychiatric and somatic comorbidity, suicide attempt and severity of current depression. Compared to GPs, psychiatrists more often prescribed tricyclics and very novel antidepressants (7.8% v 2.3% OR = 5.0 and 6.8% v 3.0% OR = 3.8) with longer duration of antidepressant treatment. GPs' patients received more "non-conventional" treatment (8.8% v 2.4% OR = 0.3) and less psychotherapy (72.2% v 89.1% OR = 3.1) (all adjusted p < .001). Conclusion: Differences between patients mainly concerned educational level and area of residence with few differences regarding clinical profile. Differences between practices of GPs and psychiatrists appear o reflect more the organization of the French care system than the competence of providers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Male infertility related to professional reprotoxic exposure has been assessed in several studies. Collaboration between occupational physicians and patients can yield information about the preventive measures that can be taken to avoid such exposure. The use of preventive measures is determined by the collaboration between reproductive medicine and occupational medicine and also by the patient's awareness of reprotoxic occupational exposures. Our andrology laboratory developed a systematic environmental interview that an occupational physician administers before semen analysis to assess patients' occupational reprotoxic chemical and physical exposures. This observational prospective study evaluated patients' feelings regarding this interview. The main outcome measure was the participants' score to determine their general reprotoxicant knowledge. The study also evaluated the patients' satisfaction about the interview with occupational physician and their attitude about reproductive toxicants., Results: The mean score for general knowledge of reprotoxicants was 9.6 ± 2.7/16. The most frequently underestimated reprotoxic factor was excessive heat (34.7 % correct responses). In cases of semen parameter abnormalities AND recognized occupational reprotoxic exposure, 63.2 % of the patients said they would use individual protective devices, and 55.1 % said they would temporarily adapt their workstation. Regarding the interview with the laboratory's occupational physician, 80.7 % considered it moderately or very useful. Of the interviewed patients, 46.2 % reported having changed their living habits 2 months after the interview, and 88.5 % were satisfied or very satisfied with the care they received. All of the respondents said it would be useful to extend the interview to include their wives., Conclusions: The data suggest that patients' knowledge about reprotoxic exposures can be improved, particularly knowledge related to physical exposure. The vast majority of patients were satisfied with the introduction of this new collaboration between reproductive and occupational medicine.