Dysmenorrhea is the most common pathology women of childbearing age face. It is defined as painful uterine cramping associated with menstruation. Primary dysmenorrhea occurs in the absence of an organic cause, whereas secondary dysmenorrhea is pelvic pain associated with an underlying pelvic pathology. The purpose of this review is to discuss the pathophysiology of dysmenorrhea and provide a discussion of pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic treatment options. Prostaglandins play a large role in the pathophysiology of dysmenorrhea by causing myometrial contraction and vasoconstriction. The first-line treatment for dysmenorrhea is with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs due to the inhibition of cyclooxygenase enzymes, thereby blocking prostaglandin formation, as well as hormonal contraception. Other pharmacologic treatment options include Paracetamol, as well as Gonadotrophic Release Hormone Analogs, which are typically used in the treatment for endometriosis. Non-pharmacologic treatments with strong evidence include heat therapy and physical exercise. There are less evidence-based data behind other modalities for treating dysmenorrhea, such as dietary supplements, acupuncture, and transcutaneous nerve stimulation, and these methods should be used in conjunction with first-line therapy after a discussion of risks and benefits. Lastly, for women who fail medical management, surgical options include endometrial ablation, presacral neurectomy, and laparoscopic uterosacral nerve ablation. Further research is needed to measure the socioeconomic burden of dysmenorrhea on the healthcare system and to evaluate the efficacy of treatment combinations, as a multi-modal approach likely provides the most benefit for women who suffer from this condition.

Breast cancer is a significant global health concern affecting millions of women each year. Digital health platforms are an easily accessible intervention that can improve patient care, though their efficacy in breast cancer care is unknown. This scoping review aims to provide an overview of existing research on the utilization of digital health platforms for breast cancer care and identify key trends and gaps in the literature. A comprehensive literature search was conducted across electronic databases, including Ovid MEDLINE, Elsevier EMBASE, and Elsevier Scopus databases. The search strategy incorporated keywords related to “digital health platforms”, “breast cancer care”, and associated terminologies. After screening for eligibility, a total of 25 articles were included in this scoping review. The identified studies comprised mobile applications and web-based interventions. These platforms demonstrated various functionalities, including patient education, symptom monitoring, treatment adherence, and psychosocial support. The findings indicate the potential of digital health platforms in improving breast cancer care and patients’ overall experiences. The positive impact on patient outcomes, including improved quality of life and reduced psychological distress, underscores the importance of incorporating digital health solutions into breast cancer management. Additional research is necessary to validate the effectiveness of these platforms in diverse patient populations and assess their impact on healthcare-resource utilization.

Background: Digital health solutions have been shown to enhance outcomes for individuals with chronic medical illnesses, but few have been validated for surgical patients. The digital health platform ManageMySurgery (MMS) has been validated for spine surgery as a feasible method for patients along their surgical journey through in-app education and completion of patient-reported outcomes surveys. Objective: The aim of this study is to determine the rates of 90-day emergency room (ER) visits, readmissions, and complications in patients undergoing spine surgery using MMS compared to patients using traditional perioperative care alone. Methods: Patients undergoing spine surgery at a US-based academic hospital were invited to use MMS perioperatively between December 2017 and September 2021. All patients received standard perioperative care and were classified as MMS users if they logged into the app. Demographic information and 90-day outcomes were acquired via electronic health record review. The odds ratios of having 90-day ER visits, readmissions, mild complications, and severe complications between the MMS and non-MMS groups were estimated using logistic regression models. Results: A total of 1015 patients were invited, with 679 using MMS. MMS users and nonusers had similar demographics: the average ages were 57.9 (SD 12.5) years and 61.5 (SD 12.7) years, 54.1% (367/679) and 47.3% (159/336) were male, and 90.1% (612/679) and 88.7% (298/336) had commercial or Medicare insurance, respectively. Cervical fusions (559/1015, 55.07%) and single-approach lumbar fusions (231/1015, 22.76%) were the most common procedures for all patients. MMS users had a lower 90-day readmission rate (55/679, 8.1%) than did nonusers (30/336, 8.9%). Mild complications (MMS: 56/679, 8.3%; non-MMS: 32/336, 9.5%) and severe complications (MMS: 66/679, 9.7%; non-MMS: 43/336, 12.8%) were also lower in MMS users. MMS users had a lower 90-day ER visit rate (MMS: 62/679, 9.1%; non-MMS: 45/336, 13.4%). After adjustments were made for age and sex, the odds of having 90-day ER visits for MMS users were 32% lower than those for nonusers, but this difference was not statistically significant (odds ratio 0.68, 95% CI 0.45-1.02; P=.06). Conclusions: This is one of the first studies to show differences in acute outcomes for people undergoing spine surgery who use a digital health app. This study found a correlation between MMS use and fewer postsurgical ER visits in a large group of spine surgery patients. A planned randomized controlled trial will provide additional evidence of whether this digital health tool can be used as an intervention to improve patient outcomes.