Provoked vestibulodynia (PVD) refers to vulvar pain of at least 3 months duration, localized to the vestibule, provoked by touch and sexual activity and occurring in the absence of a clear identifiable cause. The clinical spectrum ranges from mild with distressing discomfort through to severe and disabling pain. Current understanding is that PVD is one of many chronic pain conditions characterized by sensitization of peripheral and central nociceptive pathways, with pain arising due to dysfunctional neuronal activity in the absence of painful stimuli. Pathophysiology is not well understood but is likely a complex interplay of environmental, genetic, psychological and immune factors. Care is multidisciplinary and follows general principles of chronic pain management with the addition of specific therapy tailored to address pelvic floor overactivity, and sexual and relationship difficulties. More recently, the therapeutic use of placebo is gaining traction in chronic pain research and is a very promising adjunctive therapy. The majority of women with PVD are managed outside of tertiary clinic settings, and care depends on availability and affordability of specialized services; however, much can be done by the primary health provider. PVD is common, and highly treatable, especially with early intervention, but unfortunately, many clinicians are unaware of this condition, and the biggest hurdle for women accessing treatment is obtaining a diagnosis. With treatment, most women can expect significant improvement, often with fairly simple interventions, although some women will benefit from referral to specialized centers. The aims of this article are twofold: firstly, to summarize current literature concerning PVD pathophysiology and management; secondly, to provide a framework for clinicians unfamiliar with vulvar medicine to understand and manage PVD.

Community‐based surveys indicate that about a fifth of women have significant vulval symptoms lasting over three months at some time in their lives. Common causes of itch or pain are dermatitis, recurrent candidiasis and the recently recognised pain syndromes — vulvar vestibular syndrome and dysaesthetic vulvodynia. Diagnosis is usually apparent after a thorough history and examination, although conditions commonly coexist and are complicated by prior treatment. Skin lesions not responding to treatment require biopsy. Treatment aims to control symptoms rather than to cure; avoiding soaps and other irritants is central to management. An early, accurate diagnosis should enhance management of vulval conditions, particularly pain syndromes.

ObjectiveDespite substantial investment in Electronic Medical Record (EMR) systems there has been little research to evaluate them. Our aim was to evaluate changes in efficiency and quality of services after the introduction of a purpose built EMR system, and to assess its acceptability by the doctors, nurses and patients using it.MethodsWe compared a nine month period before and after the introduction of an EMR system in a large sexual health service, audited a sample of records in both periods and undertook anonymous surveys of both staff and patients.ResultsThere were 9,752 doctor consultations (in 5,512 consulting hours) in the Paper Medical Record (PMR) period and 9,145 doctor consultations (in 5,176 consulting hours in the EMR period eligible for inclusion in the analysis. There were 5% more consultations per hour seen by doctors in the EMR period compared to the PMR period (rate ratio = 1.05; 95% confidence interval, 1.02, 1.08) after adjusting for type of consultation. The qualitative evaluation of 300 records for each period showed no difference in quality (P>0.17). A survey of clinicians demonstrated that doctors and nurses preferred the EMR system (P<0.01) and a patient survey in each period showed no difference in satisfaction of their care (97% for PMR, 95% for EMR, P = 0.61).ConclusionThe introduction of an integrated EMR improved efficiency while maintaining the quality of the patient record. The EMR was popular with staff and was not associated with a decline in patient satisfaction in the clinical care provided.

The clinical presentation of HSV urethritis in men may differ from those of chlamydial urethritis and guide testing for HSV in men presenting with non-gonococcal urethritis.