No abstract

Background There has been increasing evidence that physicians in gynaecology are not routinely enquiring about work during consultations. Aims To explore the effect gynaecological conditions can have on work functioning, the importance of work outcomes among patients and whether work considerations are discussed during clinical consultations. Methods A cross-sectional survey was administered to employed patients attending a gynaecological clinic at Guy’s Hospital. The survey assessed four areas: demographics, gynaecological condition (including self-assessed severity), work status and perceived impact of the condition on work functioning and job satisfaction. Simple descriptive analysis and statistical techniques were used to interpret the data. Results One hundred and six participants participated (mean age: 37.49 ± 9.09). About 95% found it important to be able to work whilst receiving treatment and 82% of patients had reported at least a slight impact on their working ability due to their condition. Of the 31 patients for whom it was their first appointment, 77% said it would be useful to discuss the possible impacts their gynaecological condition could have on their work. About 66% (19/29) of the participants attending a follow-up appointment reported that their doctor had not discussed their work with them. Conclusions The symptoms of gynaecological conditions can impact patients’ ability to work. There is a lack of useful discussion from doctors about the perceived impact gynaecological conditions can have on a patient’s ability to work, despite patients finding it important to be able to remain or return to work.

There are several anatomical variants of the cervical vertebrae described in literature ranging from benign findings to those with varying clinical implications, including association with congenital diseases. We describe a case of an extremely rare anatomical variant of the cervical spine consisting of an accessory articulation of the cervical vertebrae C4 and C5 right transverse processes. The case is of a 35-year-old female who presented to primary care with six-week history of intermittent, dull neck pain. An X-ray of the cervical spine was obtained which did not demonstrate radiological evidence of an acute fracture, dislocation, nor vertebral collapse. However, the X-ray revealed subtle multi level anterior marginal osteophytic lipping. As a minor fragmented fracture or osteophytic growth could not be excluded; the patient proceeded to have a computed tomography of the cervical spine. This revealed an accessory articulation of both the C4 and C5 right transverse processes, an extremely rare anatomical variant. Our comparison of both X-ray and CT imaging modality results highlighted the importance of utilising computed tomography in identification in the accessory articulation anomaly, which aids in directing patient to appropriate care. Although similar cases may have been seen in clinical practice, to our knowledge there are no previously documented C4-5 accessory articulations in the literature.