Search

Background & Objective Epidermolysis bullosa (EB) is the term used for a group of genetic skin fragility disorders. For those living with EB, pain represents a constant challenge, with blistering and tasks such as changing dressings, adding to the distress. This paper focuses on describing and exploring the health‐care needs of children, adults and families who are affected by EB. The specific aim of the paper is to identify the needs of the EB population with a view towards informing the development of a community liaison service to support adults living with EB and the parents/carers of children living with EB. Setting and Participants Interviews with six adults and the parents of eight children with EB were conducted. The data were analysed thematically. All participants were resident on the island of Ireland and are therefore reflecting on services in this geographic region. Results Participants’ needs were grouped into five themes: support managing physical health‐care issues; access to community/home‐based services; EB‐specific information and psychosocial support; effective interaction with health‐care professionals; and advice regarding benefits and entitlements. Discussion and Conclusions This article represents the health‐care needs and preferences of a broad spectrum of those with EB, highlighting the need for a comprehensive service regardless of the severity of the condition.

Migraine affects over 40 million Americans and is the world’s second most disabling condition. As the majority of medical care for migraine occurs in primary care settings, not in neurology nor headache subspecialty practices, healthcare system interventions should focus on primary care. Though there is grade A evidence for behavioral treatment (e.g., biofeedback, cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), and relaxation techniques) for migraine, these treatments are underutilized. Behavioral treatments may be a valuable alternative to opioids, which remain widely used for migraine, despite the US opioid epidemic and guidelines that recommend against them. Identifying and removing barriers to the use of headache behavioral therapy could help reduce the disability as well as the personal and social costs of migraine. These techniques will have their greatest impact if offered in primary care settings to the lower socioeconomic status groups at greatest risk for migraine. We review the societal and cultural challenges that impose barriers to optimal use of non-pharmacological treatment services. These barriers include insufficient knowledge of migraine/headache behavioral treatments and insufficient availability of clinicians trained in non-pharmacological treatment delivery; limited access in underserved communities; financial burden; and stigma associated with both headache and mental health diagnoses and treatment. For each barrier, we discuss potential approaches to minimizing its effect and thus enhancing non-pharmacological treatment utilization. Case Example A 25-year-old graduate student with a prior history of headaches in college is attending school in the evenings while working a full-time job. Now, his headaches have significant nausea and photophobia. They are twice weekly and are disabling enough that he is unable to complete homework assignments. He does not understand why the headaches occur on Saturdays when he pushes through all week to get through his examinations that take place on Friday evenings. He tried two different migraine preventive medications, but neither led to the 50% reduction in headache days his doctor had hoped for. His doctor had suggested cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) before initiating the medications, but he had been too busy to attend the appointments, and the challenges in finding an in-network provider proved difficult. Now with the worsening headaches, he opted for the CBT and by the fifth week had already noted improvements in his headache frequency and intensity.

Purpose Standard of care for definitive treatment of locally advanced cervical cancer (LACC) is concurrent chemoradiation followed by a brachytherapy boost. Only 55.8% of women in the United States receive brachytherapy, with even lower proportions in San Diego and Imperial Counties. The purpose of this study was to investigate brachytherapy practice and referral patterns in Western United States border region. Material and methods A short survey was sent to 28 radiation oncologists in San Diego and Imperial Counties, who treat patients with gynecologic malignancies. Descriptive statistics were used for analysis. Results Seventeen (61%) physicians responded to the survey. All physicians reported some training in cervical cancer brachytherapy during residency, with median 6 months. Only two physicians reported personally treating all cervical cancer patients with brachytherapy; however, 92% of remaining physicians would recommend brachytherapy for patients if given time and access. The most common reason for referral (78%) was patients deemed to require hybrid or interstitial brachytherapy implants. Barriers to referral included patients’ preference, insurance status, their resources, or logistics. No changes were reported for brachytherapy practices during the COVID-19 pandemic, except the addition of pre-procedural testing for SARS-CoV-2. Ninety-two percent of physicians identified inadequate maintenance of skills as a barrier to performing brachytherapy, but 77% were not interested in additional training. External beam radiation therapy boosts were rarely recommended in case scenarios describing potentially curable patients. Conclusions The importance of brachytherapy is widely recognized for conferring a survival benefit, but barriers to implementation include inadequate training or maintenance of skills, and larger systematic issues related to reimbursement policy, social support, and financial hardship. As most established providers were uninterested in additional brachytherapy training, future approaches to improve patients’ access should be multidimensional and reflect the value of brachytherapy in definitive treatment of patients with LACC.

This cross-sectional study investigated if gender, education, and country of birth were associated with perceived need and unmet need for mental healthcare (i.e., refraining from seeking care, or perceiving care as insufficient when seeking it). Questionnaire and register data from 2008 were collected for 3987 individuals, aged 19–64 years, in a random population-based sample from western Sweden. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression analyses were used. Men were less likely to perceive a need for care than were women, even after adjusting for mental well-being. Men were also less likely to seek care and perceiving care as sufficient. People with secondary education were less likely to seek care than those with university education. There were no statistically significant differences based on country of birth. The observed gender and education-based inequalities increases our understanding of where interventions can be implemented. These inequalities in unmet need for mental healthcare should be targeted by the healthcare system.

Background: While Turkey hosts the largest number of Syrian refugees, the provision of health services for chronic disease among Syrian refugees in Turkey has been inadequate and understudied. This paper explores Turkish healthcare policies surrounding Syrian refugees&rsquo, access to health services for chronic diseases. Methods: We conducted a literature review and supplementary stakeholder interviews to evaluate the provision of chronic health services and the most common barriers to healthcare access among Syrian refugees in Turkey. Results: Though access to treatment for displaced Syrians has improved throughout the past five years, five primary barriers persist: registration procedure regulations, navigation of a new health system, language barriers, fear of adverse treatment, and cost. Conclusions: To drive improvements in healthcare for chronic diseases among Syrian refugees in Turkey, we recommend making registration procedures more accessible, developing more healthcare options in patients&rsquo, native language, increasing human resources, and advocating for more research surrounding chronic health conditions among refugees.