Search

Objective: People regularly contact emergency medicine services concerned that they have been exposed to drink spiking, i.e., exposure to drugs without their knowledge or permission. We identified drugs in blood and urine samples from patients suspecting exposure to drink spiking, with special consideration for drugs not reported taken by the patient (unreported drugs). Methods: From September 2018 to May 2019, we collected blood and urine samples from patients 16 years or older presenting at an emergency clinic in Oslo, Norway, within 48 hours of suspected exposure to drink spiking. We also collected information on ethanol ingestion and drugs taken. Blood samples were analyzed for 20 classical recreational drugs using ultra-high performance liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry (UHPLC-MS/MS) and an automated enzymatic method for ethanol. Urine samples were analyzed using immunoassay methods and a specific gas chromatography mass spectrometry (GCMS) method for gammahydroxybutyrate (GHB). Results: From 100 included patients (median age 24 years, 62 females), we collected 100 blood samples and 72 urine samples. Median time since exposure was 5 hours. Unreported drugs were found in 15 patients. Unreported drugs in the blood samples were clonazepam in 3, methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA) in 3, amphetamine in 2, tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) in 2, tramadol in 1, cocaine in 1, and methamphetamine in 1. Unreported drugs in the urine samples were cocaine in 5, amphetamine in 4, ecstasy in 3, and cannabis in 2. Ethanol was found in 69 patients, all reporting ethanol ingestion. Median blood ethanol concentration was higher in patients with no unreported drugs detected, 1.00‰ (interquartile range (IQR) 0–1.52) vs. 0‰ (IQR 0–0.46) (p<0.001). GHB was not detected. Conclusion: Unreported drugs, possibly used for drink spiking, were found in 15% of patients. Blood ethanol concentration was higher when no unreported drugs were found. GHB was not detected in any patient. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Research has indicated that providing women with information about menopause can improve their attitudes towards it and symptom experience. Nevertheless, information shared on the menopause is often arbitrary. Aim: To examine women's information needs about menopause, and understand if, when, and from whom they want information. Design & setting: A cross-sectional study was undertaken. A questionnaire survey was distributed to women in the waiting room of 54 general practice clinics in South-Eastern Norway in autumn 2022. Method: Medical students recruited women in the clinic waiting rooms. A 1-page study-specific questionnaire was used, focusing on need for information about menopause. A multinominal logistic regression model was used to analyse the association between the desire for information and education level, country of birth, and menopausal status. Results: A total of 625 women were included, with a mean age of 44.4 years (standard deviation [SD] 8.7). In all, 59% answered that they wanted information about menopause, and 81% of these wanted their GP to inform them, from a median age of 45 years. According to the women, only 10% of GPs had initiated a discussion on the menopause. Higher education was a predictor for wanting information. A main driver of information needs was to help oneself in the present and in the future. In all, 33% did not want information. The main reasons were that they already possessed sufficient information, would take menopause as it comes, were too young, or were already postmenopausal. The sex of the GP did not influence the results. Conclusion: Most women wanted information about menopause from their GP. The study emphasises the need for GPs to consider prioritising this discussion, and to keep up to date on recommendations and treatment options. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Long‐term breast cancer survivors (BCSs) may experience several late effects (LEs) simultaneously. This study aimed to identify subgroups of 8‐year BCSs with higher burden of LEs who could benefit from closer survivorship care, explore variables associated with higher symptom burden, and describe how symptom burden may affect general functioning. Methods: All Norwegian women aged 20 to 65 years when diagnosed with stage I‐III breast cancer in 2011 and 2012 were invited (n = 2803). The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire/BR23, the Fatigue Questionnaire, Assessment of Survivor Concerns, and Scale for Chemotherapy Induced Long‐term Neurotoxicity were used to assess 10 common LEs and general functioning. Using latent class analysis, subgroups of BCSs with similar burden of LEs were identified. Multinominal regression analysis were performed to examine variables associated with higher symptom burden. Results: The final sample consisted of 1353 BCSs; 46% had low, 37% medium, and 17% high symptom burden. Younger age, short education, axillary dissection, higher systemic treatment burden, higher body mass index, and physical inactivity were associated with higher symptom burden. General functioning scores were lower, and the proportion on disability pension were higher among BCSs in the two most burdened subgroups compared with those in the low burden subgroup. Conclusion: More than half of long‐term BCSs suffered from medium or high symptom burden and experienced impaired general functioning compared with BCS with low symptom burden. Younger age and systemic treatment were important risk factors for higher symptom burden. BCSs at risk of higher symptom burdens should be identified and offered closer and extended survivorship care. More than half of long‐term breast cancer survivors suffer from medium or high burden of late effects. Younger age and systemic treatments are important risk factors for experiencing a higher symptom burden, and breast cancer survivors with these risk factors should be prioritized for closer follow‐up care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]