Barriers to adolescent and young men's access of reproductive health care

Purpose. The purpose of this study was to identify the health needs and barriers that young men face in accessing health care and family planning services and to identify what health centers can do to attract young men to the clinic. A focus group format was used to elicit ideas from participants. ^ Methods. Forty-eight young men participated in nine focus groups. The young men were asked about the health issues they have, the barriers they face in accessing reproductive health care, and what clinics can do to attract young men to the clinic. Thematic analysis principles were used to identify the main themes that emerged in the focus groups. ^ Results. Sexually transmitted infections (STIs), mental health problems, and drug use were the major health issues that were mentioned in the majority of the focus groups. The main barriers discussed in the focus groups were attitudinal factors such as young men thinking it is unmanly to seek help, emotional factors such as young men not seeking help because of their ego or pride, and institutional factors such as the location of the clinic. The main suggestions for improvements in the health clinic included decreasing waiting times, emphasizing the fact that the clinics are free for males, having more female nurses, and encouraging clinic staff to treat the young men with respect. Young men suggested advertising and promoting the clinic in schools, in the community, and through the media. Focus group participants also provided their input about the design and format of the clinic flyer. ^ Conclusions. Many studies focus on the reproductive health care needs of adolescent and young females. This study has helped to show that young men also have health care needs and face barriers to accessing reproductive health care services.^

Incidence of breast cancer in first-degree female relatives of men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer

Prostate cancer is the most common incident cancer and the second leading cause of death in men in the United States. Although numerous attempts have been made to identify risk factors associated with prostate cancer, the results have been inconsistent and conflicting. The only established risk factors are age and ethnicity. A positive family history of prostate cancer has also been shown to increase the risk two- to three-fold among close relatives.^ There are several similarities between breast and prostate cancer that make the relationship between the two of interest. (1) Histologically, both cancers are predominantly adenocarcinomas, (2) both organs have a sexual and/or reproductive role, (3) both cancers occur in hormone-responsive tissue, (4) therapy often consists of hormonal manipulation, (5) worldwide distribution patterns of prostate and breast cancer are positively correlated.^ A family history study was conducted to evaluate the aggregation of prostate cancer and co-aggregation of breast cancer in 149 patients referred to The University of Texas, M.D. Anderson Cancer Center with newly diagnosed prostate cancer. All patients were white, less than 75 years of age at diagnosis and permanent residents of the United States. Through a personal interview with the proband, family histories were collected on 1,128 first-degree relatives. Cancer diagnoses were verified through medical records or death certificate. Standardized incidence ratios were calculated using a computer program by Monson incorporating data from Connecticut Tumor Registry.^ In this study, familial aggregation of prostate cancer was verified only among the brothers, not among fathers. Although a statistically significant excess of breast cancer was not found, the increased point estimates in mothers, sisters and daughters are consistent with a co-aggregation hypothesis. Rather surprising was the finding of a seven-fold increased risk of prostate cancer and a three-fold increased risk of breast cancer among siblings in the presence of a maternal history of any cancer. Larger family history studies including high risk (African-Americans) and lower-risk groups (Hispanics) and incorporating molecular genetic evaluations should be conducted to determine if genetic differences play a role in the differential incidence rates across ethnic groups. ^