R5 Site Visit Summary

My site visit with PA Andrea Pizzaro during my Internal Medicine rotation was an enjoyable and educational experience that greatly enhanced my understanding of adult patient care. One particularly memorable case was presented by my colleague Anja, involving an elderly patient with a complex medical history with multiple comorbidities. We discussed the intricacies of balancing blood thinning medications with fall risk, while also addressing the patient’s quality of life and potential for medication adherence. This highlighted the importance of a patient-centered approach, considering both clinical and personal factors in treatment planning.

Additionally, we delved into the management of SVT, focusing on the latest guidelines for treatment management and the role of newer medications in reducing risk of recurrent episodes. Given that, presenting my chosen journal article on the impact of new intranasal medications happened to be particularly interesting and applicable. In summary, the comprehensive discussions and case analyses during this rotation significantly improved my clinical reasoning and decision-making skills in Internal Medicine.

R5 Journal Post

The NODE-302 open-label extension study examined the safety and efficacy of self-administered intranasal etripamil for treating recurrent episodes of paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia (PSVT). Among 169 enrolled patients, 105 self-administered etripamil at least once, with a median follow-up of 232 days. The results showed a 60.2% probability of conversion to sinus rhythm within 30 minutes, with a median conversion time of 15.5 minutes. Patients who self-treated multiple episodes exhibited a consistent response, with 75% converting within 30 minutes on both episodes. Adverse events were reported by 42.9% of patients, primarily mild-to-moderate and transient, including nasal congestion and discomfort. Importantly, no serious cardiac safety events were noted within 24 hours of administration. The study concluded that etripamil nasal spray is a well-tolerated and effective self-treatment option for PSVT.

R5 H&P

H&P 2
PT Initials: LZ
Age: 32YOF
Address: Flushing, NY
Date & Time of Encounter: June 4th, 2024, 10:40am
Location: NYHQ IM
Source of Information: Self

History
Chief Complaint: “They fixed my SVT” x 15 hours ago

History of Present Illness:
32YOF pmh PSVT seen and evaluated at bedside during admission for observation after conversion of PSVT s/p adenosine in the ED yesterday at ~1900. Pt reports a history of PSVT with 3 previous episodes in her life relieved by beta blockade and vagal maneuvers; Pt denies previous h/o adenosine conversion. She recounts sudden onset of heart palpitations and tachycardia yesterday evening while resting at home after an evening walk around her neighborhood. Discomfort was felt only on the left side of her chest at mid-clavicular line, without radiation. She says that standing upright and walking around made her feel worse, resulting in dizziness that resolved once she returned to a seated position. Pt states this is the most severe episode of SVT she has experienced, rating 10/10 in severity. Her last episode was 7 months ago. She last saw a cardiologist 6 months ago who prescribed her metoprolol PRN. She notes that she has been exercising more than usual lately and believes that may have resulted in this more severe episode of SVT. Also notes poor oral intake yesterday. Denies smoking, alcohol consumption, and illicit drug use.
She presented to NYHQ ED from home accompanied by her husband after her symptoms persisted despite taking her prescribed beta-blocker and attempting Valsalva maneuver at home. Upon arrival at ED, she was administered adenosine at approximately 1915. Heart rhythm converted to sinus without complication, Pt was monitored on tele in the ED for 2 hours and maintained NSR with stable vitals. She was then moved to 5N for further observation and work-up. She denies recurrence of palpitations, CP, or dizziness since adenosine administration. Denies headache, SOB. States she is feeling well at this time, states she slept well and has a good appetite this morning. Denies complaints at this time.

Past Medical History:
Present chronic illnesses – SVT x 4 years
Past medical illnesses – Denies past illnesses
Childhood illnesses – Denies childhood illnesses
Immunizations – Up to date, including annual COVID-19 and annual influenza vaccines
Screening tests and results – Last PAP smear 2024. Pt has never undergone mammography or colonoscopy.

Past Surgical History:
Denies past surgical procedures.
Denies past injuries or transfusions.

At-Home Medications:
Metoprolol Tartrate IR PO, 25mg PRN

Vitamins and Supplement
Daily Women’s Multivitamin, unknown content, unknown dosage, once a day, last dose yesterday AM.

Allergies:
NKDA
Denies environmental or food allergies.

Family History:
Maternal/paternal grandparents – Deceased at unknown age from natural causes
Father – 75, alive and well
Mother – 64, alive and well
Sister – 25, alive and well
Denies family history of cancer or diabetes

Social History:
LZ has been married to her husband for 3 years. They live together without other members in their home.
She works full-time as an elementary school teacher,
She denies drinking any alcohol, smoking cigarettes/cigars, or using illicit drugs.
She has 1-2 cups of coffee daily.
She denies recent travel.
She reports a diet rich in meats and vegetables. She says she cooks many traditional Chinese dishes.
She reports a mostly sedentary lifestyle but has been trying to implement walking/jogging 3-4x a week recently.
She reports getting 8-9 hours of sleep each night.

Review of Systems:
General – Denies recent weight loss or gain, fever, chills, or fatigue.

Skin, hair, nails – Denies vascular changes, discolorations, or new moles/rashes.

Head – Denies headaches, syncope, or head trauma.

Eyes – Denies changes in vision, discharge, or erythema.

Ears – Denies changes in hearing, pain, or discharge.

Nose/sinuses – Denies nasal congestion, sinus congestion or sinus tenderness.

Mouth/throat – Denies sore throat, difficulty swallowing, or voice changes. Last dental exam November, 2023.

Neck – Denies swelling, tenderness, or stiffness.

Breast – Denies tenderness, nipple discharge, dermatological changes, or vascular changes.

Pulmonary system – Denies cough, wheezing, or dyspnea.

Cardiovascular system – (+) Palpitations (now resolved), (+) CP (now resolved). Denies edema.

Gastrointestinal system – Denies change in appetite, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal pain, or blood in stool.

Genitourinary system – Denies urinary frequency or urgency, dysuria, or flank pain.

Menstrual/Obstetrical – G0P0. LMP about 3 weeks ago, exact date unknown. Reports regular menstrual cycle. Reports ob/gyn assessment annually.

Nervous – (+) dizziness (now resolved). Denies weakness, sensory disturbances, ataxia, or loss of strength.

Musculoskeletal system – Reports intermittent lower back pain and stiffness relieved by rest and stretching. Denies swelling, decreased range of motion, or redness.

Peripheral vascular system – Denies varicose veins, peripheral edema, or cold extremities.

Hematological system – Denies easy bruising or bleeding, h/o blood transfusions, or h/o DVT/PE.

Endocrine system – Denies heat or cold intolerance, excessive sweating, or excessive thirst

Psychiatric – Denies anxiety or depressed mood.

Differential Diagnoses:
Atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia
Metabolic Disturbance
Hyperthyroidism
Atrioventricular reentrant tachycardia
Intraatrial reentrant tachycardia

Physical
Vital Signs:
BP (L arm): 108/72
RR: 18/min unlabored
Pulse: 88bpm, strong and regularly regular
T: 97.9 degrees F (oral)
O2 Sat: 99% Room air
Height: 62 inches Weight 145 lbs. BMI: 26.5

PE:
Gen: A&Ox3, no apparent distress, appears comfortable sitting upright in bed
Neuro: Following commands appropriately, no focal deficits, moving all extremities
CVS: Normal S1/S2, RRR, no m/r/g
Lungs: Non-labored with no accessory muscle use, CTA B/L, no adventitious sounds
Abdomen: Non-tender, non distended, soft abdomen without guarding or rebound, +BS in 4 quadrants
Peripheral: Skin normal in color, warm to touch, no cyanosis or edema of UE/LE B/L. Radial pulses +2 and regularly regular B/L.

Labs:
CBC with diff, CMP, UA, cardiac enzymes unremarkable
Imaging:
EKG: Narrow complex tachycardia consistent with SVT
CXR: unremarkable
Ordered Meds:
Metoprolol Tartrate IR PO, 25mg PRN
6mg Adenosine IV Push PRN

Assessment:
32YOF with h/o PSVT is maintaining NSR after conversion of SVT with one 6mg dose in the ED yesterday. Admitted for further observation and work-up to evaluate etiology/prevent recurrence.

Plan:
PSVT
C/w metoprolol 25mg PRN if recurrence of SVT, if refractory to BB then 6mg adenosine PRN
Repeat cardiac enzymes
TFTs to r/o hyperthyroidism
Magnesium and Phosphate levels to r/o metabolic RFs
Cardio consult/clearance for d/c and outpatient f/u

PT education:
Lifestyle Modifications
Advised the patient to avoid potential triggers such as excessive caffeine, alcohol, and stress
Management
Educated patient on recognizing symptoms of SVT, initial management with vagal maneuvers and BB, and when to seek emergency care
Ensured proper Valsalva technique
Discussed the importance of adherence to prescribed medications and follow-up appointments

Mini-CAT

Clinical Question: In between two IUD insertion appointments in the clinic during my OB/GYN rotation, I had an interesting conversation with the PA that I was working with. While the standard recommendation for IUD insertion pain management is for patients to take NSAIDs prior to the procedure, I have heard a growing sentiment amongst both clinicians and patients that this practice does not adequately manage IUD insertion pain. The PA I was working with agreed that she didn’t know evidence-based research on the topic, so I decided to do some.

PICO Question: In females undergoing IUD insertion, what is the efficacy of NSAIDs compared to placebo for pain management?

PICO
FemalesNSAIDscontrolPain control
WomenSystemic analgesiaplaceboPain management
 Naproxen Reduced pain
 Ketorolac Comfort
 Ibuprofen  

Search Strategy: 

The search tools and terms used are identified & and are consistent with the CAT. Any relevant limits, filters, etc. are included, with explanation on how the few articles were selected.

  1. CUNY York OneSearch
    1. iud insertion analgesia → 2018-2024 → 28 results
      1. The Samy et al. SR was on the first page of results
        1. Once on the PubMed link, I clicked “See all Similar Articles”
          1. I found the Sandoval et al. article on the second page of similar articles generated 
    2. Iud insertion NSAIDs → 2020-2024 → newest first → 27 results
      1. The Rahman et al. study was the first result
  2. NIH PMC
    1. “iud insertion analgesia review” → 5 years → 45 results
      1. None of the articles on the first page seemed to apply, so I did not use any of them and stopped looking
  3. Google Scholar
    1. iud pain management systematic review → 2018-2024 → 16,800 results
      1. I found the Gemzell-Danielsson K et al. article on the first page of results

In searching for my articles, my strategy had a few different components. First, I decided to only include articles from the past five years. I felt that this was especially important while researching gynecological medicine because it is an unfortunately controversial topic in our society, and its protocols and perceptions may change more frequently than other areas of medicine. Therefore, I wanted to ensure that my chosen articles were up to date. From there, I knew I wanted to focus primarily on systematic reviews/meta-analyses – Not only because they provide the highest level of evidence, but also because I know that my search question is fairly broad. Being that there are so many types of NSAIDs commonly used in American medicine, I felt that only a systematic review that included qualifying articles that tested a variety of different NSAID agents could be helpful in evaluating the drug class on a larger scale to help answer my research question. RCTs and other types of studies often focus only on one drug, and while it is important for me to know the efficacy of individual drugs while developing the answer to my research question, it felt much more efficient to seek out high power systematic reviews that analyzed multiple RCTs at once. From there, I browsed articles and chose ones that thoroughly vetted the articles they included and specifically had analyses dedicated to the efficacy of NSAIDs. Of note, although the Sandoval et al. study is not a systematic review, its aims were highly relevant to my research question and it reviewed multiple RCTs at once, which aligned with my research strategy.

Articles Chosen for Inclusion:

LinkEvaluating different pain lowering medications during intrauterine device insertion: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
CitationSamy A, Abbas AM, Mahmoud M, et al. Evaluating different pain lowering medications during intrauterine device insertion: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. 2019;111(3):553-561.e4. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.11.012
AbstractObjective: To synthesize the evidence on the most effective medications for the relief of intrauterine device (IUD) insertion-related pain.Design: Systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).Setting: Not applicable.Patient(s): Patients undergoing IUD insertion who received different medications for pain relief versus those who received placebo.Intervention(s): Electronic search in the following bibliographic databases: Medline via PubMed, SCOPUS, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and ScienceDirect.Main outcome measure(s): Visual analog scale (VAS) pain score during tenaculum placement, IUD insertion, and 5 to 20 minutes after insertion, the score of easiness of insertion and the need for additional analgesics.Result(s): The present review included 38 RCTs (n = 6,314 patients). The network meta-analysis showed that lidocaine-prilocaine cream (genital mucosal application) statistically significantly reduced pain at tenaculum placement compared with placebo (mean difference -2.38; 95% confidence interval, -4.07 to -0.68). In the ranking probability order, lidocaine-prilocaine cream ranked the highest in reducing the pain at tenaculum placement, followed by lidocaine (paracervical). Similarly, lidocaine-prilocaine cream ranked as the highest treatment in pain reduction during IUD insertion, followed by lidocaine (paracervical).Conclusion(s): Lidocaine-prilocaine cream is the most effective medication that can be used for IUD insertion-related pain. Other medications are not effective.
LinkDiffering Approaches to Pain Management for Intrauterine Device Insertion and Maintenance: A Scoping Review.
CitationRahman M, King C, Saikaly R, et al. Differing Approaches to Pain Management for Intrauterine Device Insertion and Maintenance: A Scoping Review. Cureus. 2024;16(3):e55785. Published 2024 Mar 8. doi:10.7759/cureus.55785
AbstractPain control and anxiety management during intrauterine device (IUD) insertion should be a highly prioritized aspect standard of care during the procedural treatment plan. In fact, pain perceived by females during intrauterine device insertion often limits the use of this effective contraceptive method. However, there is said to be a gap in the literature regarding official procedures for pain management during IUD implantation. This recently published systematic review sought to analyze pain control options during IUD insertion. Regarding pharmacological methods, local agents were significantly more effective in controlling pain than systemic agents including intramuscular naproxen, diclofenac, ketorolac, and prophylactic oral ibuprofen, none of which produced effective pain relief. This suggests that it is important to have a drug act directly in the vagina and on the cervix to manage pain during IUD insertion. Specifically, lidocaine administration via paracervical block appears to be most effective option and should be utilized more frequently by clinicians performing IUD insertion procedures.
LinkInterventions for the prevention of pain associated with the placement of intrauterine contraceptives: An updated review
CitationGemzell-Danielsson K, Jensen JT, Monteiro I, et al. Interventions for the prevention of pain associated with the placement of intrauterine contraceptives: An updated review. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2019;98(12):1500-1513. doi:10.1111/aogs.13662
AbstractA 2013 review found no evidence to support the routine use of pain relief for intrauterine contraceptive (IUC) placement; however, fear of pain with placement continues to be a barrier to use for some women. This narrative review set out to identify (1) new evidence that may support routine use of pain management strategies for IUC placement; (2) procedure‐related approaches that may have a positive impact on the pain experience; and (3) factors that may help healthcare professionals identify women at increased risk of pain with IUC placement. A literature search of the PubMed and Cochrane library databases revealed 550 citations, from which we identified 43 new and pertinent studies for review. Thirteen randomized clinical trials, published since 2012, described reductions in placement‐related pain with administration of oral and local analgesia (oral ketorolac, local analgesia with different lidocaine formulations) and cervical priming when compared with placebo or controls. Four studies suggested that ultrasound guidance, balloon dilation, and a modified placement device may help to minimize the pain experienced with IUC placement. Eight publications suggested that previous cesarean delivery, timing of insertion relative to menstruation, dysmenorrhea, expected pain, baseline anxiety, and size of insertion tube may affect the pain experienced with IUC placement. Oral and local analgesia and cervical priming can be effective in minimizing IUC placement‐related pain when compared with placebo, but routine use remains subject for debate. Predictive factors may help healthcare professionals to identify women at risk of experiencing pain. Targeted use of effective strategies in these women may be a useful approach while research continues in this area.
LinkAlleviating Pain with IUD Placement: Recent Studies and Clinical Insight.
CitationSandoval, S., Meurice, M.E., Pebley, N.B. et al. Alleviating Pain with IUD Placement: Recent Studies and Clinical Insight. Curr Obstet Gynecol Rep 11, 12–20 (2022). https://doi-org.york.ezproxy.cuny.edu/10.1007/s13669-022-00324-9
AbstractPurpose of ReviewThe pain associated with intrauterine device placement (IUD) may decrease uptake of this highly effective form of contraception. The purpose of this review is to present recently studied methods and techniques employed by clinicians to reduce pain with IUD placement.Recent FindingsParacervical and intracervical lidocaine blocks are effective options for pain control during IUD placement. Lidocaine blocks are particularly effective in nulliparous patients during IUD placement. Topical or vaginal lidocaine are not effective in decreasing pain with IUD placement.SummaryBased on the existing published literature and our clinical experience, we recommend clinicians use several modalities to decrease pain associated with IUD placement. For nulliparous women, we recommend an intracervical or paracervical lidocaine block prior to IUD placement. Misoprostol use should be limited to when a patient had a prior unsuccessful IUD placement attempt or known cervical stenosis. NSAIDs can help with post-procedure pain but do not help with pain during the placement.

Summary of the Evidence:

Author (Date)Level of EvidenceSample/Setting(# of subjects/ studies, cohort definition etc. )Outcome(s) studiedKey FindingsLimitations and Biases
Samy et al., 2019SR with Meta-analysis38 RCTs (n = 6,314 patients)Trials included:1) menstruating nulliparous or multiparous women receiving IUD insertion in the form of LNG or copper-bearing devices, 2) examination of medications for the management of IUD insertion-related pain, 3) comparison of interventions with placebo
Exclusion of: head-to-head trials with no placebo arm, studies published in languages other than English, academic theses, and conference proceedings.
-Visual analog scale (VAS) pain score during tenaculum placement, IUD insertion, and 5 to 20 minutes after insertion-Score of easiness of insertion-Need for additional analgesicsNSAIDs were not effective in reducing IUD-insertion related pain, regardless of their type or dose. -20 mg of ketorolac demonstrated a superior trend over other NSAIDs, nitroprusside, nitroglycerine, and misoprostol in reducing insertion-related pain. -Naproxen administered in conjunction with lidocaine paracervical block before IUD insertion may result in a greater reduction in pain– There were statistically significant inconsistencies in the pooled effect estimates, which may have been due to wide variations in the characteristics of studies’ population, designs, and reference tests- The methodological quality of the included studies ranged from low to moderate, which may have affected the quality of the present evidence.
Rahman et al., 2024Systematic ReviewN = 19 studies- peer-reviewed, published between January 2015 and September 2022, and discussed pain management protocols for IUD insertion- Only randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, and case studies were included – limited to those that included women who were 18-65 years old or of childbearing age who did not have the following: 1) any other comorbidities or medical conditions (PID, adenomyosis, etc.) and 2) any other concurrent contraceptive use. 
-Visual analog scale (VAS) pain score during tenaculum placement, IUD insertion, and 5 to 20 minutes after insertion Systemic methods of analgesia did not produce effective pain relief, meaning it is important to have the drug act directly in the vagina and on the cervix to manage pain during IUD insertion
Pain reduced with:-combination of two 50 mg diclofenac potassium oral tablets and 2% lidocaine cervical gel- 20 mg ketorolac oral tablets-Cervical cream (+prilocaine) 
Pain did not reduce with:-Lidocaine Intrauterine solution ± oral naproxen-Oral Naproxen ± intrauterine lidocaine-IM ketorolac (but had reduced pain 5 and 15 minutes following IUD insertion)-Oral ibuprofen 
– Small sample sizes increasing the risk of error-Search criteria failed to include a specific IUD- The perception of pain is inherently individualized and nuanced, rendering it a challenging parameter to accurately quantify and report. -There is little data evaluating the pain experienced in the days following IUD insertion. 
Gemzell-Danielsson et al., 2019
Systematic Review-Studies analyzing pharmacological interventions for pain management during IUD placement, published from December 2012 to September 2018-The final numberof publications included in our review was 43. -10‐cm or 100‐mm visualanalogue scale (VAS), where 0 is equivalent to “no pain” and 10 isequivalent to “worst pain ever”, by study participants to indicatethe severity of pain experienced at various times during procedure
Reduction of pain with:- oral ketorolac (20 mg) given 40‐60 minutes before IUD placement when compared with placebo, but 1‐2 hours after administration 
Insignificant reduction of pain:-550 mg naproxen sodium, N2O/O2, and ibuprofen 
-The study was not limited to RCTs, so study quality and sample size may vary, increasing the risk of error and decreasing the level of evidence-The perception of pain is subjective and not all studies assessed for it at the same times-There is little data evaluating the pain experienced in the days following IUD insertion 
Sandoval et al., 2022Literature ReviewThe purpose of this review is to present recently studied methods and techniques employed by clinicians to reduce pain with IUD placement.
The article does not explicitly state its selection criteria, however, it reviews and compares the findings of ~30 individual peer-reviewed RCTs testing the efficacy of every clinically relevant category of IUD insertion analgesic interventions.
The review itself is peer-reviewed.
-The visual analogue scale (VAS), asking participants to mark their pain intensity from 0 mm (no pain) to 100 mm (worst pain). -Prior studies have established a clinically significant reduction in pain as a reduction of 15–20 mm on the 100 mm VAS-NSAIDs do not help with pain control at the time of IUD placement, NSAIDs do decrease post-procedural cramping, likely through inhibition of prostaglandin production. -800 mg ibuprofen compared with placebo given thirty to forty-five minutes prior to IUD placement had no effect-30mg of ketorolac IM 30min prior to IUD placement had significant lower pain scores at 5-15 min after IUD placement -550 mg oral naproxen given one hour prior to placement had significant lower pain scores at 5-15 min after IUD placement-The selection criteria of the included RCTs were not explicitly outlined, so this is more of a literature review than a systematic review and it is possible the quality of the articles compromise the quality of the study–The perception of pain is subjective and not all studies assessed for it at the same times-There is little data evaluating the pain experienced in the days following IUD insertion 

Conclusion(s):
Samy et al found that NSAIDs, including ketorolac, were not effective in reducing IUD-insertion related pain overall. However, 20 mg of ketorolac showed a trend of superiority over other NSAIDs, nitroprusside, nitroglycerine, and misoprostol in reducing insertion-related pain. Additionally, naproxen administered with lidocaine paracervical block before IUD insertion may result in a greater reduction in pain.

Rahman et al found that systemic methods of analgesia were not effective in providing pain relief during IUD insertion. Direct application of analgesics in the vagina and on the cervix showed some effectiveness in reducing pain, particularly with combinations such as diclofenac potassium oral tablets and lidocaine cervical gel, and 20 mg ketorolac oral tablets.

Gemzell-Danielsson et al found that oral ketorolac (20 mg) given 40‐60 minutes before IUD placement was found to reduce pain compared to placebo. However, other interventions like 550 mg naproxen sodium, nitrous oxide/oxygen, and ibuprofen showed insignificant reduction in pain.

Sandoval et al found that interventions such as 800 mg ibuprofen, 30 mg of ketorolac IM, and 550 mg oral naproxen given prior to IUD placement did not show a significant difference in mean or median pain scores during insertion. However, there were some reductions in pain scores noted at specific time points after IUD placement in the ketorolac and naproxen groups.

Systemic methods of analgesia as monotherapy do not appear to provide effective pain relief during IUD insertion. While some studies found oral ketorolac to be an effective modality, findings are inconsistent. However, NSAIDs may be useful in combination with direct application of analgesics in the vaginal and cervical regions during the procedure, as well as an intervention to reduce post-procedural pain, possibly through inhibition of prostaglandin production. Of the NSAIDs commonly used, oral ketorolac seems to show the greatest analgesic effect across studies (although not unequivocally, as Samy et al. did not find it to be effective). Naproxen and diclofenac have mixed results and perhaps a greater benefit as an adjunct, and ibuprofen is consistently ineffective. 

Clinical Bottom Line:

In developing my clinical bottom line, it is important to compare and contrast the findings of articles, while acknowledging they each have varying strength as sources. The Samy et al. systematic review, being the most robust study that I evaluated and the only meta-analysis, is of the highest evidence. It provides a comprehensive overview of the efficacy of NSAIDs for pain management during IUD insertion and analyzes multiple NSAIDs to assess their effectiveness and compare effects between studies. However, its robustness may have a negative effect on its strength of evidence as it created more instances of inconsistencies between studies. The Rahman et al. study is the most recent study and is also extremely systematic, so comparing it with Samy et al. is of high value. The Gemzell-Danielsson et al. systematic review is of lesser quality than the two aforementioned, since it was not limited to RCTs. Lastly, since the Sandoval et al. article is not a systematic review, it still aligns with my research strategy of using sources that review multiple studies, and offers additional data to compare and contrast to the higher strategy studies.

Keeping this in mind, I feel as though my clinical bottom line is that NSAIDs alone are not effective in pain management during IUD insertion. My strongest article by Samy et al. definitely concludes this to be the case. Although some studies found 20mg oral ketorolac monotherapy to be effective, most studies analyzed in my sources seem to agree that a clinically significant reduction in pain as a reduction of 15–20 mm on the 100mm VAS, and the statistically significant analgesic effect of ketorolac monotherapy seen in certain studies was not large. This relatively small effect in combination with the ineffective findings of Samy et al. lead me to conclude that ketorolac monotherapy as an analgesic modality during IUD insertion is not effective.

With all of this being said, NSAIDs can and should have an adjunct role in patients undergoing IUD insertion. All studies agree that certain dual therapies combining systemic NSAIDs with topical intracervical analgesic gels/creams are effective analgesic options for IUD insertion. Given that ketorolac seems to show the most consistent and possibly monotherapeutic effect, I would prescribe a dual therapy pain management plan with preprocedural oral ketorolac in combination with an intracervical agent at the time of the procedure. This should reduce pain both during and after the IUD insertion. Naproxen dual therapy is also worthy of consideration, taking into account the individual histories, needs, and preferences of patients, as multiple studies found this regimen effective as well. In the future, it would be helpful to conduct a study comparing a ketorolac/intracervical topical agent dual therapy regimen with a naproxen/intracervical topical agent dual therapy regimen in order to determine with certainty if one is more effective than the other. 

R4 Journal Article

This noninferiority trial involved children aged 2 months to 10 years diagnosed with symptomatic UTI that exhibited clinical improvement after the first 5 days of antimicrobials. From there, they received either placebo (short-course group) or more antimicrobials (standard-course group). The standard-course group was associated with lower rates of treatment failure, asymptomatic bacteriuria, and positive urine culture after days 11-14. However, treatment failure rate was still low in the short-course group, and rates of UTI after day 11 to 14 were similar between groups, suggesting that differences in bacteriuria or positive urine culture did not contribute to subsequent UTI development. Children with fever at the time of diagnosis did not show a significant difference in treatment failure between study arms. Furthermore, most children whose therapy failed were afebrile and not at risk for kidney scarring. Given that approximately 67 children need to be treated with standard-course therapy to prevent 1 febrile UTI and that scarring occurs in approximately 1 in 7 children with febrile UTI, approximately 469 children would need to be treated to prevent 1 child from developing kidney scarring.

This trial has several strengths: a large, diverse population of children; enrollment of a sizeable proportion of children with fever at presentation (38%); use of stringent diagnostic criteria for UTI; enrollment of children treated with various antimicrobials;monitoring for targeted antimicrobial resistance in stool commensals; andmodest attrition. Limitations stem from slight imbalance between treatment groups in number of children excluded from the primary analysis, reduced power for subgroup analyses, assessment of emergence of antimicrobial resistance only for E coli and K pneumoniae strains, lack of detailed data on the societal costs and benefits of each treatment strategy, absence of data on adherence to the originally prescribed antimicrobials on days 1 to 5, lack of strain-level data on recovered uropathogens, and lack of data on outcomes, such as kidney scarring.

R4 Site Eval

My site visit with Professor Maida was an enriching group experience that deepened my understanding of pediatric care. One notable case was presented by my classmate Ian, involving a child with an inflammatory reaction to a new ear piercing. We discussed the protocol to remove the foreign body, but also discussed maintaining empathy to the potential for the child to be disappointed about removing the piercing, emphasizing a holistic approach to patient care. We also reviewed the management of asthma exacerbations, differentiating treatment steps based on severity. I enjoyed analyzing and presenting the journal article I chose about UTI treatment duration in kids. In summary, the group dynamic and detailed discussions significantly enhanced my clinical decision-making skills in pediatrics.

R4 Rotation Reflection

My five-week pediatrics rotation revealed the specialty to be a bit less varied in case-type than I had anticipated. Working in an outpatient office, I primarily saw routine well-child visits and mild acute illnesses such as allergic respiratory and gastrointestinal issues. I found that many of the topics I had learned about in the classroom were not apparent in this setting, but I’m not surprised by that given the office was not equipped to handle more acute cases. Comparing experiences with my classmates, it was interesting to realize as well how seasonally affected an office such as the one I worked in can be. For example, while I saw so many patients with allergy symptoms during the spring, my classmates who worked in the winter saw primarily respiratory infections. Perhaps the variety exists more within the seasonal changes that shift trends in chief complaint. Regardless, the repetition certainly enhanced my understanding of the pediatric primary care PA and allowed me to build confidence in my pediatric patient assessment.

Peds H+P

Identifying Data:

Patient Initials: JL

Age: 9Y 11M

Date & Time of Encounter: 4/30/24 at 2:14pm

Location of Encounter: Jamaica, Queens

Source of Information: Mother/Self

Reliability: Reliable

Chief Complaint: “Rash on nose” x 2 weeks

History of Present Illness:

9YOM bib mom concerned for rash on Pt’s nose x 1 week. She notes an erythematous, bumpy area on Pt’s external R nostril that began soon after he sustained a small laceration to the area from a branch at the park.  Pt says the area is warm and tender to touch, but denies unprovoked pain or itchiness. Mom reports that the Pt has continued to pick at the newer lesions on his face, and they have become more prominent since onset. They have not spread beyond his nose, they deny known rash or skin lesions elsewhere on the body. Denies fever, congestion, cough, eye pain/swelling/discharge, visual changes. Denies h/o similar symptoms. Denies known sick contacts. Mom says she has tried topical aloe vera to the area without relief or improvement.

Past Medical History:

Present illnesses – Denies

Past medical illnesses – Denies

Immunizations – Per CIR, Pt is UTD on all eligible vaccinations.

Screening tests and results – Last annual physical with CMP and CBC on 6/6/23 without abnormal findings. Vision 20/20 OU uncorrected. Last dental appointment 1/2024.

Past Surgical History:

None

Medications: 

None

Allergies:

NKDA, denies known food or environmental allergies

Family History:

Father: alive 37 yrs, healthy

Mother: alive 31 yrs, healthy

Family medical history unknown.

Pt has no siblings.

Social History:

JL is a 9YOM who lives at home w/ his mother and father. There are no other members of the home.

Habits – N/A

Travel – None

Diet – Mom says PT eats an omnivorous diet rich in most fruits and vegetables.

Exercise – Mom says PT plays sports seasonally, but is otherwise sedentary.

Sleep – 9-10 hours a night uninterrupted 

Safety measures – Pt travels primarily by bus

Review of Systems:

General: Denies fever, chills, fatigue, loss of appetite.

Skin, hair, nails: Reports an area of rough, erythematous skin with multiple raised lesions on external R nostril. Denies pruritus, swelling, erythema, or rash elsewhere on body. 

Head: Denies headache, head trauma, dizziness.

Eyes: Denies swelling, pruritus, warmth, and erythema. 

Ears: Denies pruritus, pain, discharge, or hearing loss.

Nose/Sinuses: Describes rash on R nostril as described above. Denies discharge, congestion, epistaxis, anosmia.

Mouth and throat: Denies sore throat, voice changes, dental pain.

Neck: Denies localized swelling, pain, or decreased range of motion.

Respiratory: Denies cough, shortness of breath, difficulty breathing, wheezing.

Cardiovascular system: Denies chest pain, palpitations.

Gastrointestinal system: Denies loss of appetite, nausea and vomiting, dysphagia, abdominal pain, diarrhea.

Genitourinary: Denies urinary frequency, urgency, dysuria.

Musculoskeletal System: Denies deformity, swelling, pain.

Peripheral Vascular System: Denies peripheral edema, color change. 

Nervous System: Denies sensory disturbances, weakness, 

Psychiatric: Mom reports Pt is generally in good spirits. Denies h/o psychiatric care.

Physical

General:  9YOM who appears his stated age, appears well-groomed and dressed appropriately for the weather. Pt maintains eye contact and answers questions appropriately without signs of acute distress.

Vital Signs:

Temperature: 97.9F

O2 Sat: 100% RA

Height: 51”

Weight: 76 lbs.

BMI: 20.54

Respiratory Rate: 18

Heart Rate: 84bpm

Hair, Head, and Face:

Head is normocephalic, atraumatic. Facial features are symmetrical with no signs of drooping or swelling.

Skin, and Nails: 

The skin is warm and moist. Non-icteric with no swelling or signs of ecchymosis. No rash or lesions on torso, back, or extremities.

Eyes:

Symmetrical OU. PERRLA,  EOMs intact with no nystagmus or lid lag. Visual fields full OU. 

No strabismus, exophthalmos or ptosis.  Sclera white, cornea clear, conjunctiva pink. No discharge.

Ear:

Ears are symmetrical and appropriate in size. No lesions, masses, trauma, or FBs on external ears. TMs pearly white with intact light reflex AU. No foreign bodies, discharge, effusions, perforations, or erythema AU. 

Nose and Sinus: 

Singular erythematous 1.5×1.5 cm area containing multiple honey-colored vesicles and pustules on lateral aspect of external R nostril. The nose is otherwise symmetrical without masses, deformities, trauma. Nasal mucosa is pink and moist. 

Mouth and Pharynx: 

The lips are pink with no blisters, fissures, or cyanosis. Tongue and buccal mucosa are pink and moist without swelling. Oropharynx without swelling, erythema, cobblestoning. Tonsils present without swelling, erythema, or exudates. 

Neck, Thyroid, and Lymph Nodes:

The trachea is midline without masses or scars. No anterior cervical lymphadenopathy on palpation.  

Cardiac:

Regular rate and rhythm, S1 and S2 present on auscultation. No murmurs, gallops, rubs, S3, or S4.

Thorax and Lung: 

Lung sounds CTA in all lobes B/L. No adventitious sounds.

Assessment: 

9YOM presents with yellow-crusted erythematous plaques localized to the external right nostril. 

DDx: 

  1. Impetigo
  2. Erysipelas
  3. Molluscum
  4. Tinea
  5. Verrucae Vulgaris

Plan:

  1. Skin Pustules of R nare
    1. Mupirocin Ointment to R nostril 2x a day for 5 days
    2. Wash hands before and after application and otherwise avoid contact with the affected area