{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.07142857142857142, 'fraction_numerical': 0.05606758832565284, 'mean_word_length': 4.640692640692641, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Determination of iron status in women attending genitourinary clinics with pruritus vulvae

Objective: To compare iron status in women with pruritus vulvae and in asymptomatic controls. Methods: 42 women with pruritus vulvae and 42 asymptomatic broadly age-matched controls were enrolled in this prospective study. The outcome measures assessed were serum iron, serum ferritin, total iron-binding capacity, haemoglobin and transferrin saturation. Results: 12 (29%) participants and 10 (24%) controls were iron deficient; 1 (2%) participant and 1 (2%) control had laboratory-defined iron deficiency anaemia. Participants generally had lower levels of iron markers than controls, with differences (95% confidence interval (CI)) of −3.5 μg/l (−9.89 to 6.99) for serum ferritin (p = 0.73), −4.9 mmol/l (−8.12 to 0.12) for serum iron (p = 0.06) and −5.5 mmol/l (−5.75 to 1.46) for total iron-binding capacity (p = 0.24). No significant difference in haemoglobin or mean cell volume was shown between the two groups (haemoglobin: p = 0.17, 95% CI −0.83 to 0.15; mean cell volume: p = 0.15, 95% CI −4.59 to 0.73). Conclusion: This study does not provide evidence to support the routine determination of iron status in patients presenting to genitourinary medicine clinics with pruritus vulvae from all causes.