Search

ABSTRACT Introduction. Both the general public and individual patients expect healthcare providers to be knowledgeable and approachable regarding sexual health. Despite this expectation there are no universal standards or expectations regarding the sexuality education of medical students. Aims. To review the current state of the art in sexuality education for North American medical students and to articulate future directions for improvement. Methods. Evaluation of: (i) peer-reviewed literature on sexuality education (focusing on undergraduate medical students); and (ii) recommendations for sexuality education from national and international public health organizations. Main Outcome Measures. Current status and future innovations for sexual health education in North American medical schools. Results. Although the importance of sexuality to patients is recognized, there is wide variation in both the quantity and quality of education on this topic in North American medical schools. Many sexual health education programs in medical schools are focused on prevention of unwanted pregnancy and sexually transmitted infection. Educational material on sexual function and dysfunction, female sexuality, abortion, and sexual minority groups is generally scant or absent. A number of novel interventions, many student initiated, have been implemented at various medical schools to improve the student's training in sexual health matters. Conclusions. There is a tremendous opportunity to mold the next generation of healthcare providers to view healthy sexuality as a relevant patient concern. A comprehensive and uniform curriculum on human sexuality at the medical school level may substantially enhance the capacity of tomorrow's physicians to provide optimal care for their patients irrespective of gender, sexual orientation, and individual sexual mores/beliefs. Shindel AW and Parish SJ. Sexuality education in North American medical schools: Current status and future directions. J Sex Med 2013;10:3-18. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The objective of The North American Menopause Society (NAMS) and The International Society for the Study of Women's Sexual Health (ISSWSH) Expert Consensus Panel was to create a point of care algorithm for treating genitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM) in women with or at high risk for breast cancer. The consensus recommendations will assist healthcare providers in managing GSM with a goal of improving the care and quality of life for these women. The Expert Consensus Panel is comprised of a diverse group of 16 multidisciplinary experts well respected in their fields. The panelists individually conducted an evidence-based review of the literature in their respective areas of expertise. They then met to discuss the latest treatment options for genitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM) in survivors of breast cancer and review management strategies for GSM in women with or at high risk for breast cancer, using a modified Delphi method. This iterative process involved presentations summarizing the current literature, debate, and discussion of divergent opinions concerning GSM assessment and management, leading to the development of consensus recommendations for the clinician.Genitourinary syndrome of menopause is more prevalent in survivors of breast cancer, is commonly undiagnosed and untreated, and may have early onset because of cancer treatments or risk-reducing strategies. The paucity of evidence regarding the safety of vaginal hormone therapies in women with or at high risk for breast cancer has resulted in avoidance of treatment, potentially adversely affecting quality of life and intimate relationships. Factors influencing decision-making regarding treatment for GSM include breast cancer recurrence risk, severity of symptoms, response to prior therapies, and personal preference.We review current evidence for various pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic therapeutic modalities in women with a history of or at high risk for breast cancer and highlight the substantial gaps in the evidence for safe and effective therapies and the need for future research. Treatment of GSM is individualized, with nonhormone treatments generally being first line in this population. The use of local hormone therapies may be an option for some women who fail nonpharmacologic and nonhormone treatments after a discussion of risks and benefits and review with a woman's oncologist. We provide consensus recommendations for an approach to the management of GSM in specific patient populations, including women at high risk for breast cancer, women with estrogen-receptor positive breast cancers, women with triple-negative breast cancers, and women with metastatic disease.