Brief Distress Screening in Clinical Practice: Does it Help to Effectively Allocate Psycho-Oncological Support to Female Cancer Inpatients?

BACKGROUND The usefulness of distress screening in cancer inpatient settings has rarely been investigated. This study evaluated a brief distress screening of inpatients in a breast cancer centre and a gynaecological cancer centre. PATIENTS AND METHODS Hospitalised patients with breast or gynaecological cancers were screened with the Distress Thermometer. Patients who scored above the cut-off, were referred by the medical staff, or self-referred were offered bedside psycho-oncological counselling. RESULTS Of 125 patients, 68 (54.4%) received an offer of counselling, and 62 patients (49.6%) accepted. Most of the counselling was induced by distress screening. Only 4 (3.2%) patients self-referred to the counselling service. Of the counselled patients, 65.8% stated that they had substantially benefited from psycho-oncological support; only 5.6% of the non-counselled patients indicated that they might have benefited from psycho-oncological support. CONCLUSION Almost all patients who will accept and benefit from psycho-oncological counselling can be identified if distress screening is used in conjunction with referrals by physicians and nurses. Distress screening is a worthwhile component in a framework of psycho-oncological support in a cancer inpatient setting. It paves the way to counselling for cancer inpatients who need it and are willing to accept it but hesitate to self-refer to psycho-oncological services

Gender Bias in Urology: How Do Patients Really Choose Their Urologist?

Purpose: The present study aimed to investigate the influence of patients’ and urologists’ gender when choosing a urologist. With rising population diversity through immigration and generational differences, patient-centered healthcare has recently moved to the focus of European healthcare systems. As healthcare in urology often concentrates on sensitive topics, and often involves gender-specific diseases, research on the influence of gender on decision-making processes is of high importance. Understanding influence of gender on patients’ choices in real life would provide patients, and physicians alike, with the means to provide better resources to achieve greater satisfaction from visits to a urologist. Patients and Methods: A questionnaire was prepared, and patients at our tertiary referral center were given the opportunity to voluntarily participate in our survey. We collected questionnaires from 1012 patients during their visits from June 2021 to October 2021. Results: Patients were divided into groups according to their gender: male (n=763), female (n=246), and non-binary (n=3). Our patient cohort consisted of more men than women (75% vs 24%), with only three patients identifying as non-binary. Irrespective of the patients’ own gender, patients preferred a male urologist when problems were considered embarrassing, limiting daily activities, or when worrisome. When problems were considered painful, all patients preferred a female urologist. When patients had had a previous positive experience with a female or male urologist, they preferred to be treated by a female or male urologist, respectively. Overall, 65% of patients stated a gender preference for at least one given situation, or consultation scenario. Conclusion: As the majority of our patients stated a gender preference, urological departments should be considerate of potential patients’ preferences for urologist gender that may be based on the individual patient’s history, taking a comprehensive approach to fulfill the patients’ need for same gender urologists in educational hospitals and health care services

Gender Bias in Urology: How Do Patients Really Choose Their Urologist?

Purpose: The present study aimed to investigate the influence of patients’ and urologists’ gender when choosing a urologist. With rising population diversity through immigration and generational differences, patient-centered healthcare has recently moved to the focus of European healthcare systems. As healthcare in urology often concentrates on sensitive topics, and often involves gender-specific diseases, research on the influence of gender on decision-making processes is of high importance. Understanding influence of gender on patients’ choices in real life would provide patients, and physicians alike, with the means to provide better resources to achieve greater satisfaction from visits to a urologist. Patients and Methods: A questionnaire was prepared, and patients at our tertiary referral center were given the opportunity to voluntarily participate in our survey. We collected questionnaires from 1,012 patients during their visits from June 2021 to October 2021. Results: Patients were divided into groups according to their gender: male (n=763), female (n=246), and non-binary (n=3). Our patient cohort consisted of more men than women (75% vs. 24%), with only three patients identifying as non-binary. Irrespective of the patients’ own gender, patients preferred a male urologist when problems were considered embarrassing, limiting daily activities, or when worrisome. When problems were considered painful, all patients preferred a female urologist. When patients had had a previous positive experience with a female or male urologist, they preferred to be treated by a female or male urologist, respectively. Overall, 65% of patients stated a gender preference for at least one given situation, or consultation scenario. Conclusions: As the majority of our patients stated a gender preference, urological departments should be considerate of potential patients’ preferences for urologist gender that may be based on the individual patient's history, taking a comprehensive approach to fulfill the patients’ need for same gender urologists in educational hospitals and health care services

Genetic influences on schizophrenia and subcortical brain volumes:Large-scale proof of concept

Schizophrenia is a devastating psychiatric illness with high heritability. Brain structure and function differ, on average, between people with schizophrenia and healthy individuals. As common genetic associations are emerging for both schizophrenia and brain imaging phenotypes, we can now use genome-wide data to investigate genetic overlap. Here we integrated results from common variant studies of schizophrenia (33,636 cases, 43,008 controls) and volumes of several (mainly subcortical) brain structures (11,840 subjects). We did not find evidence of genetic overlap between schizophrenia risk and subcortical volume measures either at the level of common variant genetic architecture or for single genetic markers. These results provide a proof of concept (albeit based on a limited set of structural brain measures) and define a roadmap for future studies investigating the genetic covariance between structural or functional brain phenotypes and risk for psychiatric disorders