title: Should HRT be duration limited?
abstract: Hormone Replacement Therapy (HRT) has received consistently bad press, despite re-analysis of previous data new studies and supporting Consensus Statements from leading national and international societies. Many women have been convinced by women's journals and the media not to even consider HRT as an option and, General Practitioners, still limit duration to 5 years or, will, arbitrarily, discontinue prescriptions in the early 50s. This article seeks to make sense of our current position. Previous and new evidence on the safety of HRT is reviewed. New data on the long-term consequences of non-treatment of women with Premature Ovarian Insufficiency (POI) is presented and the dichotomy of the older female workforce is explored. From this, a logical plan of management emerges.
authors: North West London Hospitals, NHS Trust, Harrow, UK.
authors: Joan
authors: J
authors: Pitkin
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D004334:Drug Administration Schedule; D015914:Estrogen Replacement Therapy; D019317:Evidence-Based Medicine; D005260:Female; D019584:Hot Flashes / Q000188:drug therapy*; D006801:Humans; D008875:Middle Aged; D015663:Osteoporosis, Postmenopausal / Q000517:prevention & control; D017410:Practice Guidelines as Topic; D013222:State Medicine; D006113:United Kingdom; D016387:Women's Health
keywords: British Menopause Society; Hormone replacement therapy; International Menopause Society; National Osteoporosis Society; consensus statement; duration of therapy; premature ovarian failure; premature ovarian insufficiency; safety data