Research presented at the 72nd Annual Scientific Meeting of the American College of Gastroenterology found that obesity, among other important risk factors, was the strongest risk factor for colorectal cancer in women.
Joseph C. Anderson, MD of Stony Brook University in New York (and the University of Connecticut) and his colleagues examined data from 1,252 women who underwent colonoscopy. They classified patients according to their age, smoking history, family history of colorectal cancer, and body mass index (BMI). Obesity was defined as a BMI of 30 or higher. For smoking, patients were divided into three groups: heavy exposure, low exposure, and no exposure. Patients who were in the heavy exposure group included women who had smoked more than 10 "pack years" and who were currently smoking or had quit in the past 10 years.
Although smoking posed a significant increased risk for colorectal neoplasia, researchers found that for women, obesity was the highest attributable risk factor for developing the disease. BMI accounted for one-fifth of all significant polyps detected during colonoscopy. Of those patients who had colorectal neoplasia, 20 percent were obese and 14 percent were smokers.
"Given the increasing number of obese patients in the U.S., identifying them as high risk may have important screening implications," said Dr. Anderson. "While obesity is positively associated with an increased risk of colorectal cancer, patients who lower their BMI could potentially reduce their risk of developing the disease in the future."
About Body Mass Index (BMI)
Body mass index, or BMI, is a measurement that determines the healthiness of a person's weight. The formula is related to the amount of fat a person carries and is calculated using the person's height and weight. A healthy BMI is between 18.5 and 24.9. People are considered underweight if their BMI is less than 18.5, overweight if their BMI is between 25 and 29.9, and obese if their BMI is 30 or higher.
About the American College of Gastroenterology
Founded in 1932, the American College of Gastroenterology (ACG) is an organization with an international membership of more than 10,000 individuals from 80 countries. The College is committed to serving the clinically oriented digestive disease specialist through its emphasis on scholarly practice, teaching and research. The mission of the College is to serve the evolving needs of physicians in the delivery of high quality, scientifically sound, humanistic, ethical, and cost-effective health care to gastroenterology patients.
The ACG is committed to providing accurate, unbiased and up-to-date health information. Visit the ACG Web site American College of Gastroenterology
to access educational resources for patients and their families spanning the broad range of digestive diseases and conditions -- both common and not-so-common. Organized by disease, state and organ system, these educational materials, developed by ACG physician experts, are offered for the information and benefit of patients and the public.
Source: Rosanne Riesenman
American College of Gastroenterology
четверг, 23 февраля 2012 г.
четверг, 16 февраля 2012 г.
Mammography: Is It Right For Me? New Book Shines Light On Mammography Controversy
The subject of changing public advice over the years, mammography and the controversy over its use continue to cause confusion in the minds of many women. A new book for lay readers entitled "Understanding the Mammography Controversy: Science, Politics, and Breast Cancer Screening" (Praeger Press), by women's health expert Dr. Madelon L. Finkel of Weill Medical College of Cornell University, provides a comprehensive guide to mammography, the mammography controversy and breast health.
The book directly addresses the still-controversial issues, such as deciding when is the "right" time to have a mammogram, what is the "right" age for mammography (the body of evidence indicates a benefit for women aged 50 to 69) and whether mammography is useful at all (it is). While not perfect, mammography is the only population-based breast cancer screening method that has been shown to actually save lives.
"It's no wonder women are confused about mammography. Sensational media stories tout the latest scientific studies, often contradicting previous findings. Above all, women need to separate the facts from the myths in order to make informed decisions about their breast health," says Dr. Finkel, professor of clinical public health and director of the Office of Global Health Education at Weill Cornell Medical College.
This book includes a timeline that details the disagreement within the scientific community and changing public advice on mammography over the years.
"The mammography debate is still not yet settled. While the latest research shows that mammography can save lives, there is still no overall consensus on what age mammogram screening should be recommended, and even whether the benefits of mammogram screening outweigh the risks in the first place," says Dr. Finkel." Each woman must consider her personal risk factors, and in consultation with her doctor, decide when and how frequently mammography should be scheduled."
The book offers readers practical information, including how to give a breast self-exam, how to communicate with one's doctor, a list of support groups and organizations for breast cancer patients, and resources for clinical trials.
"Most women will not develop breast cancer in their lifetime, and for those who do, it's no longer a death sentence. Thanks to public awareness, screening, research and new treatment options, it has become a treatable, chronic illness," says Dr. Finkel.
"Understanding the Mammography Controversy: Science, Politics, and Breast Cancer Screening" received the highest rating from BookList. The book is dedicated to the author's mother, who died of breast cancer.
Dr. Madelon Finkel
Dr. Madelon Finkel has been involved in epidemiologic research and health-care policy studies for more than two decades. Her research has been focused on such women's health issues as teenage sexual behavior and hormone replacement therapy.
Dr. Finkel received an M.P.A. and Ph.D. in epidemiology and health services research from NYU. In addition to her titles at Weill Cornell Medical College, Dr. Finkel also holds the rank of professor of research in medicine at SUNY Stony Brook, and was a visiting professor at the School of Public Health, University of Sydney (Australia) in 2004. She is a member of the American College of Epidemiology, an advisor to the American Council on Science and Health, and a charter member of the Academy of Benefit Authors of the International Foundation of Employee Benefit Plans. Dr. Finkel was awarded the highest teaching honor at Weill Cornell, the Excellence in Teaching Award, in 2000 and 2005.
The Joan and Sanford I. Weill Medical College
The Joan and Sanford I. Weill Medical College -- located in New York City -- is committed to excellence in research, teaching, patient care and the advancement of the art and science of medicine. The Medical College, which is a principal academic affiliate of NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital, offers an innovative curriculum that integrates the teaching of basic and clinical sciences, problem-based learning, office-based preceptorships, and primary care and doctoring courses. Physicians and scientists of Weill Cornell Medical College are engaged in cutting-edge research in such areas as stem cells, genetics and gene therapy, geriatrics, neuroscience, structural biology, cardiovascular biology, AIDS, obesity, cancer and psychiatry -- and continue to delve ever-deeper into the molecular basis of disease in an effort to unlock the mysteries behind the human body and the malfunctions that result in serious medical disorders. Weill Cornell Medical College is the birthplace of many medical advances -- from the development of the Pap test for cervical cancer to the synthesis of penicillin, the first successful embryo-biopsy pregnancy and birth in the U.S., and most recently, the world's first clinical trial for gene therapy for Parkinson's disease. Weill Cornell's Physician Organization includes 650 clinical faculty who provide the highest quality of care to patients.
Joan and Sanford I. Weill Medical College of Cornell University
nyp
The book directly addresses the still-controversial issues, such as deciding when is the "right" time to have a mammogram, what is the "right" age for mammography (the body of evidence indicates a benefit for women aged 50 to 69) and whether mammography is useful at all (it is). While not perfect, mammography is the only population-based breast cancer screening method that has been shown to actually save lives.
"It's no wonder women are confused about mammography. Sensational media stories tout the latest scientific studies, often contradicting previous findings. Above all, women need to separate the facts from the myths in order to make informed decisions about their breast health," says Dr. Finkel, professor of clinical public health and director of the Office of Global Health Education at Weill Cornell Medical College.
This book includes a timeline that details the disagreement within the scientific community and changing public advice on mammography over the years.
"The mammography debate is still not yet settled. While the latest research shows that mammography can save lives, there is still no overall consensus on what age mammogram screening should be recommended, and even whether the benefits of mammogram screening outweigh the risks in the first place," says Dr. Finkel." Each woman must consider her personal risk factors, and in consultation with her doctor, decide when and how frequently mammography should be scheduled."
The book offers readers practical information, including how to give a breast self-exam, how to communicate with one's doctor, a list of support groups and organizations for breast cancer patients, and resources for clinical trials.
"Most women will not develop breast cancer in their lifetime, and for those who do, it's no longer a death sentence. Thanks to public awareness, screening, research and new treatment options, it has become a treatable, chronic illness," says Dr. Finkel.
"Understanding the Mammography Controversy: Science, Politics, and Breast Cancer Screening" received the highest rating from BookList. The book is dedicated to the author's mother, who died of breast cancer.
Dr. Madelon Finkel
Dr. Madelon Finkel has been involved in epidemiologic research and health-care policy studies for more than two decades. Her research has been focused on such women's health issues as teenage sexual behavior and hormone replacement therapy.
Dr. Finkel received an M.P.A. and Ph.D. in epidemiology and health services research from NYU. In addition to her titles at Weill Cornell Medical College, Dr. Finkel also holds the rank of professor of research in medicine at SUNY Stony Brook, and was a visiting professor at the School of Public Health, University of Sydney (Australia) in 2004. She is a member of the American College of Epidemiology, an advisor to the American Council on Science and Health, and a charter member of the Academy of Benefit Authors of the International Foundation of Employee Benefit Plans. Dr. Finkel was awarded the highest teaching honor at Weill Cornell, the Excellence in Teaching Award, in 2000 and 2005.
The Joan and Sanford I. Weill Medical College
The Joan and Sanford I. Weill Medical College -- located in New York City -- is committed to excellence in research, teaching, patient care and the advancement of the art and science of medicine. The Medical College, which is a principal academic affiliate of NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital, offers an innovative curriculum that integrates the teaching of basic and clinical sciences, problem-based learning, office-based preceptorships, and primary care and doctoring courses. Physicians and scientists of Weill Cornell Medical College are engaged in cutting-edge research in such areas as stem cells, genetics and gene therapy, geriatrics, neuroscience, structural biology, cardiovascular biology, AIDS, obesity, cancer and psychiatry -- and continue to delve ever-deeper into the molecular basis of disease in an effort to unlock the mysteries behind the human body and the malfunctions that result in serious medical disorders. Weill Cornell Medical College is the birthplace of many medical advances -- from the development of the Pap test for cervical cancer to the synthesis of penicillin, the first successful embryo-biopsy pregnancy and birth in the U.S., and most recently, the world's first clinical trial for gene therapy for Parkinson's disease. Weill Cornell's Physician Organization includes 650 clinical faculty who provide the highest quality of care to patients.
Joan and Sanford I. Weill Medical College of Cornell University
nyp
четверг, 9 февраля 2012 г.
Helping Teens Overcome Fears And Stigmas Of Mental Illness
When teens start experiencing changes in moods or emotions, they tend to fear sharing their blue days with their families and adults who can help them. As a consequence, they often suffer in silence.
Case Western Reserve University KL2 Clinical Research Scholar and Instructor Melissa Pinto-Foltz from the Frances Payne Bolton School of Nursing wants to find the magical elixir that helps teens speak up, seek help and then stick with treatments that get them feeling better.
"About one in five Americans has a mental illness, with half of these individuals first experiencing symptoms of mental illness in their teen years," she said.
Pinto-Foltz's research contributes to efforts nationwide to combat a public health issue, stigma and mental health literacy, made a priority in a U. S. Surgeon General's Report and the President's New Freedom Commission on Mental Health.
She found that a good way to reach teens to help them learn about mental illness and improve negative attitudes about mental illness was through their school.
She studied 156 girls in the 9th and 10th grade in a research project set in public high schools in Louisville, Ky. About half the group participated in a special national program called In Our Own Voice, offered by the National Alliance for Mental Illness, and the other half did not see the program.
More than 200,000 people across the U.S. have seen the In Our Own Voice program, which is frequently given in schools, churches and other community settings. The one-hour program involves learning through storytelling and changing attitudes through interacting with people who are in sustained recovery from mental illness. These individuals tell their personal stories of what it was like to first discover the illness and get through their recovery from the illness.
While the program is widely used across the U.S., no evidence exists that it is effective with teens, nor has the impact of the program been examined for an extended time period.
Pinto-Foltz used the In Our Own Voice program with the teens and reported her findings from the study, "Feasibility, Acceptability, and Initial Efficacy of a Knowledge-Contact Program to Reduce Mental Illness Stigma and Improve Mental Health Literacy in Adolescents," in Social Science and Medicine.
"We tell stories every day to friends, family and co-workers," she said. "The whole idea behind this approach is that people learn about the world through stories, and interacting with people with mental illness may violate previously held stereotypes. We wanted to see if teens responded to these interactions with and stories told by people with mental illness in such a way that it decreased stigma associated with mental illness and improved their knowledge of mental illness."
She followed participants four times over 10 weeks: first to study what stigmas and knowledge they had about mental illness, then in response to the In Our Own Voice program. She conducted follow-up interviews shortly after girls saw the program and again at weeks 4 and 8 to see if there were changes in the their level of stigma associated with mental illness and whether their knowledge of mental illness increased.
Pinto-Foltz's 10-week study found that the girls liked and learned from the In Our Own Voice storytelling program, but the program was too short to change some of the girls' stigmas that they would be more accepting of individuals with mental illness.
"This was our first assessment of In Our Own Voice as it's currently given, and it's a starting point to tackle stigma and improve mental health literacy among adolescents using existing approaches," she said.
In the future, she added that we can increase our chance of combating stigma and increasing mental health knowledge by providing more opportunities for adolescents to interact with the presenters following the program.
She suggested continued interaction with the presenters through projects with the girls or visits to their health classes for further discussions about mental illness.
"The girls were eager for more interaction with the presenters," Pinto-Foltz explained. "They kept asking me when the presenters would return to tell more stories. After the program, the girls had many lingering questions about mental illness. Increasing their interaction with the presenters would allow an opportunity to clarify their questions about mental illness, increase their comfort in interacting with individuals with mental illness, and decrease stigma."
Meanwhile in the follow-up with the girls at four and eight weeks, Pinto-Foltz found that girls who participated in In Our Own Voice had improved mental health knowledge when compared to the girls who did not receive the program.
Stigma levels for both groups remained the same, calling for further examination of approaches to tackle this important and pervasive problem, Pinto-Foltz said.
This research was support by the Midwest Nursing Research Society and the Iota Chapter of Sigma Theta Tau.
Source:
Susan Griffith
Case Western Reserve University
Case Western Reserve University KL2 Clinical Research Scholar and Instructor Melissa Pinto-Foltz from the Frances Payne Bolton School of Nursing wants to find the magical elixir that helps teens speak up, seek help and then stick with treatments that get them feeling better.
"About one in five Americans has a mental illness, with half of these individuals first experiencing symptoms of mental illness in their teen years," she said.
Pinto-Foltz's research contributes to efforts nationwide to combat a public health issue, stigma and mental health literacy, made a priority in a U. S. Surgeon General's Report and the President's New Freedom Commission on Mental Health.
She found that a good way to reach teens to help them learn about mental illness and improve negative attitudes about mental illness was through their school.
She studied 156 girls in the 9th and 10th grade in a research project set in public high schools in Louisville, Ky. About half the group participated in a special national program called In Our Own Voice, offered by the National Alliance for Mental Illness, and the other half did not see the program.
More than 200,000 people across the U.S. have seen the In Our Own Voice program, which is frequently given in schools, churches and other community settings. The one-hour program involves learning through storytelling and changing attitudes through interacting with people who are in sustained recovery from mental illness. These individuals tell their personal stories of what it was like to first discover the illness and get through their recovery from the illness.
While the program is widely used across the U.S., no evidence exists that it is effective with teens, nor has the impact of the program been examined for an extended time period.
Pinto-Foltz used the In Our Own Voice program with the teens and reported her findings from the study, "Feasibility, Acceptability, and Initial Efficacy of a Knowledge-Contact Program to Reduce Mental Illness Stigma and Improve Mental Health Literacy in Adolescents," in Social Science and Medicine.
"We tell stories every day to friends, family and co-workers," she said. "The whole idea behind this approach is that people learn about the world through stories, and interacting with people with mental illness may violate previously held stereotypes. We wanted to see if teens responded to these interactions with and stories told by people with mental illness in such a way that it decreased stigma associated with mental illness and improved their knowledge of mental illness."
She followed participants four times over 10 weeks: first to study what stigmas and knowledge they had about mental illness, then in response to the In Our Own Voice program. She conducted follow-up interviews shortly after girls saw the program and again at weeks 4 and 8 to see if there were changes in the their level of stigma associated with mental illness and whether their knowledge of mental illness increased.
Pinto-Foltz's 10-week study found that the girls liked and learned from the In Our Own Voice storytelling program, but the program was too short to change some of the girls' stigmas that they would be more accepting of individuals with mental illness.
"This was our first assessment of In Our Own Voice as it's currently given, and it's a starting point to tackle stigma and improve mental health literacy among adolescents using existing approaches," she said.
In the future, she added that we can increase our chance of combating stigma and increasing mental health knowledge by providing more opportunities for adolescents to interact with the presenters following the program.
She suggested continued interaction with the presenters through projects with the girls or visits to their health classes for further discussions about mental illness.
"The girls were eager for more interaction with the presenters," Pinto-Foltz explained. "They kept asking me when the presenters would return to tell more stories. After the program, the girls had many lingering questions about mental illness. Increasing their interaction with the presenters would allow an opportunity to clarify their questions about mental illness, increase their comfort in interacting with individuals with mental illness, and decrease stigma."
Meanwhile in the follow-up with the girls at four and eight weeks, Pinto-Foltz found that girls who participated in In Our Own Voice had improved mental health knowledge when compared to the girls who did not receive the program.
Stigma levels for both groups remained the same, calling for further examination of approaches to tackle this important and pervasive problem, Pinto-Foltz said.
This research was support by the Midwest Nursing Research Society and the Iota Chapter of Sigma Theta Tau.
Source:
Susan Griffith
Case Western Reserve University
четверг, 2 февраля 2012 г.
Outcomes For Robotic-Assisted Hysterectomy Similar To Conventional Laparoscopy, Study Finds
Two methods of performing a minimally invasive hysterectomy -- either by a surgeon alone or with assistance of robotic equipment -- produced similar, positive outcomes in women with endometrial cancer, according to a study in the journal Obstetrics & Gynecology, Reuters reports. The study's authors said both methods proved superior to the traditional open procedure, which involves a relatively large abdominal incision.
More than 40,000 women are diagnosed with endometrial cancer in the U.S. every year. Treatment usually involves a hysterectomy -- the surgical removal of the uterus -- and often the removal of lymph nodes to determine the stage of the cancer.
The conventional minimally invasive procedure is performed through laparoscopy, using a small incision and a video camera, but it requires intensive training on the part of the surgeon. The robot, though adding a few thousand dollars to the procedure's price, provides better vision, improves range of motion and uses more intuitive movements.
The study found that both minimally invasive techniques resulted in longer operations but shorter hospital stays, compared with the open procedure. The robotic surgery caused about half as much blood loss as the standard laparoscopy. There were no differences in complications among the three techniques.
"Robotics increases the chance that a hysterectomy can be done by laparoscopy," Tommaso Falcone of the Cleveland Clinic said. "However, if the surgeon is skilled enough to do the hysterectomy without the robot by laparoscopy, then the outcomes will be similar," he said (Peeples, Reuters, 11/29).
Reprinted with kind permission from nationalpartnership. You can view the entire Daily Women's Health Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery here. The Daily Women's Health Policy Report is a free service of the National Partnership for Women & Families.
© 2010 National Partnership for Women & Families. All rights reserved.
Подписаться на:
Комментарии (Atom)