Browsing by Author "Caldwell, Amy"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Association between intrauterine device use and endometrial, cervical, and ovarian cancer: an expert review
    (Elsevier, 2023-08) Minalt, Nicole; Caldwell, Amy; Yedlicka, Grace M.; Joseph, Sophia; Robertson, Sharon E.; Landrum, Lisa M.; Peipert, Jeffrey F.; Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine
    The intrauterine device is one of the most effective forms of contraception. Use of the intrauterine device has increased in the United States over the last 2 decades. Two formulations are commercially available in the United States: the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device and the copper intrauterine device. The levonorgestrel intrauterine device releases progestin, causing endometrial suppression and cervical mucus thickening, whereas the primary mechanism of action of the copper intrauterine device is to create a local inflammatory response to prevent fertilization. Whereas the protective effects of combined hormonal contraception against ovarian and endometrial cancer, and of tubal sterilization against ovarian cancer are generally accepted, less is known about the effects of modern intrauterine devices on the development of gynecologic malignancies. The best evidence for a protective effect of intrauterine device use against cancer incidence pertains to levonorgestrel intrauterine devices and endometrial cancer, although studies suggest that both copper intrauterine devices and levonorgestrel intrauterine devices reduce endometrial cancer risk. This is supported by the proposed dual mechanisms of action including both endometrial suppression and a local inflammatory response. Studies on the relationship between intrauterine device use and ovarian cancer risk show conflicting results, although most data suggest reduced risk of ovarian cancer in intrauterine device users. The proposed biological mechanisms of ovarian cancer reduction (foreign-body inflammatory response, increased pH, antiestrogenic effect, ovulation suppression) vary by type of intrauterine device. Whereas it has been well established that use of copper intrauterine devices confers a lower risk of cervical intraepithelial neoplasms, the effect of levonorgestrel intrauterine device use on cervical cancer remains unclear. Older studies have linked its use to a higher incidence of cervical dysplasia, but more recent literature has found a decrease in cervical cancer with intrauterine device use. Various mechanisms of protection are postulated, including device-related inflammatory response in the endocervical canal and prostaglandin-mediated immunosurveillance. Overall, the available evidence suggests that both levonorgestrel intrauterine devices and copper intrauterine devices reduce gynecologic cancer risk. Whereas there is support for the reduction of endometrial cancer risk with hormonal and copper intrauterine device use, and reduction of cervical cancer risk with copper intrauterine device use, evidence in support of risk reduction with levonorgestrel intrauterine device use for cervical and ovarian cancers is less consistent.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Change in Medical Students’ Attitudes Towards Family Planning after a Pregnancy Options Counseling Panel
    (2024-04-26) Peipert, Leah J.; Brown, Lucy; King, Carli; Bhamidipalli, Surya Sruthi; Stout, Julianne; Peipert, Jeffrey F.; Caldwell, Amy
    INTRODUCTION: Abortion is one of the most commonly performed procedures in the U.S., but abortion education is lacking in medical curricula. Previous studies have shown that clinical exposure to abortion care in medical school can change students’ attitudes about abortion, yet few medical schools incorporate abortion education during students’ preclinical years. STUDY OBJECTIVE: This study evaluates changes in medical students’ attitudes after a virtual pregnancy counseling panel intervention during pre-clinical medical education at Indiana University School of Medicine. We hypothesized that students would feel more comfortable counseling and treating patients for unplanned pregnancy after attending the virtual panel. METHODS: Students participated in a “Pregnancy Options Panel” during their second-year course covering reproductive health. The panel consisted of OBGYNs, a pediatrician, and a social worker. Using a case study format, panelists guided discussion of appropriate care for a patient diagnosed with an unintended pregnancy. Two identical 19-item surveys consisting of multiple-choice and open-ended questions were electronically disseminated before and after the panel to assess students’ comfort and beliefs about family planning counseling and treatment. Statistical analyses were performed using non-parametric statistics (Wilcoxon signed rank and McNemar’s test) to compare before and after responses of participants. The study was IRB exempt. RESULTS: The second-year medical school class enrolled in the reproductive health course at Indiana University was composed of 366 students with 189 students (51.6%) identifying as female. Of the 366 students, 171 students (46.7%) completed surveys before and after the panel. Demographics were as follows: 60.6% female, 37.6% male, 64.9% white, 2.9% black, 84.6% non-Hispanic, and 10.7% Hispanic. After the pregnancy panel, students reported increased comfort when contemplating referral to an abortion provider, prescribing a medication abortion, and performing a surgical abortion compared to prior to the panel (p<0.01, all comparisons). Students were more likely to withhold disclosing their personal beliefs about abortion when counseling a pregnant patient (64.6% vs 42.3%, p<0.01), felt more capable of approaching the conversation about pregnancy options in a genuinely neutral manner (86.4% vs 71.6%, p<0.01), and had a significant increase in preparedness to counsel on continuing pregnancy, abortion, and adoption (p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Our pregnancy options counseling panel effectively guided students through a common reproductive health scenario counseling a patient with unintended pregnancy. Second year preclinical medical students felt more prepared to counsel patients neutrally and without influence of their own beliefs after attending the educational event. Students additionally felt more comfortable referring to an abortion provider, prescribing a medical abortion, and performing a surgical abortion after the panel, emphasizing how exposure to family planning scenarios can influence future physicians’ comfort providing non-judgmental counseling and abortion care. Expert panels comprised of health professionals with diverse clinical and social perspectives on pregnancy options can serve as an instructional model for preparing medical students for their obstetric and gynecological clinical clerkship and improving pre-clinical medical curriculum on the often-neglected topic of abortion.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Impact of Dobbs Decision on Retention of Indiana Medical Students for Residency
    (Elsevier, 2023-10-08) Hulsman, Luci; Bradley, Paige K.; Caldwell, Amy; Christman, Megan; Rusk, Debra; Shanks, Anthony L.
    Background: As medical students consider residency training programs, access to comprehensive training in abortion care and the legal climate influencing abortion care provision are likely to affect their decision process. Objective: This study aimed to determine medical students' desire to stay in a state with an abortion ban for residency. Study design: A cross-sectional survey was distributed to all medical students at a large allopathic medical school. Anonymous survey questions investigated the likelihood of seeking residency training in states with abortion restrictions and the likelihood of considering obstetrics and gynecology as a specialty. Qualitative responses were also captured. Results: The survey was distributed to 1424 students, and 473 responses yielded a 33.2% completion rate; 66.8% of students were less likely to pursue residency training in Indiana following a proposed abortion ban. Moreover, 70.0% of students were less likely to pursue residency in a state with abortion restrictions. Approximately half of respondents (52.2%) were less likely to pursue obstetrics and gynecology as a specialty after proposed abortion restrictions. Qualitative remarks encompassed 6 themes: comprehensive health care access, frustration with the political climate, impact on health care providers, relocation, advocacy, and personal beliefs and ethical considerations. Conclusion: Most medical students expressed decreased likelihood of remaining in Indiana or in states with abortion restrictions for residency training. The field of obstetrics and gynecology has been negatively affected, with medical students indicating lower likelihood to pursue obstetrics and gynecology. Regardless of specialty, the physician shortage may be exacerbated in states with abortion restrictions. The overturn of Roe v Wade has the potential for significant effects on medical student plans for residency training location, thereby shaping the future of the physician workforce.