Screening women for Functional Hypothalamic Amenorrhea (FHA)
Research type
Research Study
Full title
A questionnaire-based study to improve the diagnosis of Functional Hypothalamic Amenorrhea (FHA) in women with secondary amenorrhea attending hospital
IRAS ID
281379
Contact name
Channa Jayasena
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
Imperial College London
Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier
Pending, ISRCTN registration details
Duration of Study in the UK
3 years, 0 months, 0 days
Research summary
Research Summary
What do we know already? Many women suffer a loss of periods (amenorrhoea). One of the most common causes of period loss is called ‘functional hypothalamic amenorrhea (FHA)’. FHA is difficult to diagnose and may be mistaken for other conditions causing period loss, such as polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS). This could cause delays in starting the correct treatment. We want to develop a questionnaire to help by identifying which women are most likely to have FHA.
What is the justification for doing this study? Undiagnosed women with FHA are predisposed to complications related to low oestrogen levels such as osteoporosis, bone fractures and infertility. The failure to accurately identify women with FHA and mislabel those women with FHA as having PCOS may delay appropriate treatment which causes harm for affected women, including bone fractures and infertility.
What do we propose?
Improve the diagnosis of women with FHA by composing an assessment score, which could be used by women to improve the accuracy of diagnosing FHA. We will design a questionnaire based on literature search which will be used to identify women with FHA. We will finally perform a questionnaire-based study (on-line or in person) to identify risk of FHA in women referred to hospital with period loss.Summary of Results
It has not been possible to recruit the proposed number of participants in the original application. This was challenging due to COVID-19 and virtual consultations making it difficult to recruit the required number of participants. In total 20 participants were recruited which is too small to provide meaningful results and statistical analysis.
REC name
London - Fulham Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
20/PR/0959
Date of REC Opinion
10 Feb 2021
REC opinion
Further Information Favourable Opinion