Among the primary care providers surveyed, distrust and confusion likely limit adherence to current evidence-based cervical cancer screening health policy recommendations, and contribute to the current high rates of overscreening that have been observed.

Mycotic aneurysms are a rare cause of intracranial aneurysms that develop in the presence of infections such as infective endocarditis. They account for a small percentage of all intracranial aneurysms and carry a high-mortality rate when ruptured. The authors report a case of a 54-year-old man who presented with infective endocarditis of the mitral valve and acute stroke. He subsequently developed subarachnoid hemorrhage during antibiotic treatment, and a large intracranial aneurysm was discovered on CT Angiography. His lesion quickly progressed into an intraparenchymal hemorrhage, requiring emergent craniotomy and aneurysm clipping. Current recommendations on the management of intracranial Mycotic Aneurysms are based on few retrospective case studies. The natural history of the patient's ruptured aneurysm is presented, as well as a literature review on the management and available treatment modalities.

Background:Current evidence-based cervical cancer testing guidelines recommend that screening of low-risk women ceases after age 65. Despite this, research suggests that continued testing by primary care providers remains common and represents unnecessary patient discomfort, cost, and consumption of valuable primary care resources.Objective:To understand why primary care providers might knowingly ignore consensus evidence-based screening guidelines for cervical cancer in low-risk women of this age-group and to identify barriers to adherence with best practice recommendations.Methods:A survey tool to identify barriers to adherence with current guidelines for cervical cancer screening in low-risk women older than age 65 was mailed to 4929 randomly selected primary care providers throughout California. Providers were asked to indicate the predominant reason(s) they might knowingly continue cervical cancer screening in women older than 65 years, despite evidence-based recommendations to the contrary.Results:Qualified surveys were received from 1259 (25.5%) of those surveyed, representing primary care providers of all types, practicing in areas of vastly different demographics. Despite published reassurance to the contrary, many providers retain fear that discontinuation of testing in low-risk women after age 65 may result in missed invasive cervical cancer. Even among health-care providers who agree that cessation of screening is safe, other circumstances prompt their recommendation to continue cervical screening.Conclusion:Although the data from this study suggest areas of policy intervention to lessen unnecessary cervical cancer screening, the broader implication is that advancement of evidence-based medicine will be of little value in improving the quality and cost of health care if barriers to guideline adherence are poorly understood and addressed.