Cargando…

Baseline data from a planned RCT on attitudes to female genital cutting after migration: when are interventions justified?

OBJECTIVES: To present the primary outcomes from a baseline study on attitudes towards female genital cutting (FGC) after migration. DESIGN: Baseline data from a planned cluster randomised, controlled trial. Face-to-face interviews were used to collect questionnaire data in 2015. Based on our hypoth...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wahlberg, Anna, Johnsdotter, Sara, Selling, Katarina Ekholm, Källestål, Carina, Essén, Birgitta
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5724060/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28801440
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017506
_version_ 1783285287879704576
author Wahlberg, Anna
Johnsdotter, Sara
Selling, Katarina Ekholm
Källestål, Carina
Essén, Birgitta
author_facet Wahlberg, Anna
Johnsdotter, Sara
Selling, Katarina Ekholm
Källestål, Carina
Essén, Birgitta
author_sort Wahlberg, Anna
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: To present the primary outcomes from a baseline study on attitudes towards female genital cutting (FGC) after migration. DESIGN: Baseline data from a planned cluster randomised, controlled trial. Face-to-face interviews were used to collect questionnaire data in 2015. Based on our hypothesis that established Somalis could be used as facilitators of change among those newly arrived, data were stratified into years of residency in Sweden. SETTING: Sweden. PARTICIPANTS: 372 Somali men and women, 206 newly arrived (0–4 years), 166 established (>4 years). PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Whether FGC is acceptable, preferred for daughter and should continue, specified on anatomical extent. RESULTS: The support for anatomical change of girls and women’s genitals ranged from 0% to 2% among established and from 4% to 8% among newly arrived. Among those supporting no anatomical change, 75%–83% among established and 53%–67% among newly arrived opposed all forms of FGC, with the remaining supporting pricking of the skin with no removal of tissue. Among newly arrived, 37% stated that pricking was acceptable, 39% said they wanted their daughter to be pricked and 26% reported they wanted pricking to continue being practised. Those who had lived in Sweden ≤ 2 years had highest odds of supporting FGC; thereafter, the opposition towards FGC increased over time after migration. CONCLUSION: A majority of Somali immigrants, including those newly arrived, opposed all forms of FGC with increased opposition over time after migration. The majority of proponents of FGC supported pricking. We argue that it would have been unethical to proceed with the intervention as it, with this baseline, would have been difficult to detect a change in attitudes given that a majority opposed all forms of FGC together with the evidence that a strong attitude change is already happening. Therefore, we decided not to implement the planned intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Trial registration number NCT02335697;Pre-results.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5724060
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-57240602017-12-19 Baseline data from a planned RCT on attitudes to female genital cutting after migration: when are interventions justified? Wahlberg, Anna Johnsdotter, Sara Selling, Katarina Ekholm Källestål, Carina Essén, Birgitta BMJ Open Global Health OBJECTIVES: To present the primary outcomes from a baseline study on attitudes towards female genital cutting (FGC) after migration. DESIGN: Baseline data from a planned cluster randomised, controlled trial. Face-to-face interviews were used to collect questionnaire data in 2015. Based on our hypothesis that established Somalis could be used as facilitators of change among those newly arrived, data were stratified into years of residency in Sweden. SETTING: Sweden. PARTICIPANTS: 372 Somali men and women, 206 newly arrived (0–4 years), 166 established (>4 years). PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Whether FGC is acceptable, preferred for daughter and should continue, specified on anatomical extent. RESULTS: The support for anatomical change of girls and women’s genitals ranged from 0% to 2% among established and from 4% to 8% among newly arrived. Among those supporting no anatomical change, 75%–83% among established and 53%–67% among newly arrived opposed all forms of FGC, with the remaining supporting pricking of the skin with no removal of tissue. Among newly arrived, 37% stated that pricking was acceptable, 39% said they wanted their daughter to be pricked and 26% reported they wanted pricking to continue being practised. Those who had lived in Sweden ≤ 2 years had highest odds of supporting FGC; thereafter, the opposition towards FGC increased over time after migration. CONCLUSION: A majority of Somali immigrants, including those newly arrived, opposed all forms of FGC with increased opposition over time after migration. The majority of proponents of FGC supported pricking. We argue that it would have been unethical to proceed with the intervention as it, with this baseline, would have been difficult to detect a change in attitudes given that a majority opposed all forms of FGC together with the evidence that a strong attitude change is already happening. Therefore, we decided not to implement the planned intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Trial registration number NCT02335697;Pre-results. BMJ Publishing Group 2017-08-11 /pmc/articles/PMC5724060/ /pubmed/28801440 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017506 Text en © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted. This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
spellingShingle Global Health
Wahlberg, Anna
Johnsdotter, Sara
Selling, Katarina Ekholm
Källestål, Carina
Essén, Birgitta
Baseline data from a planned RCT on attitudes to female genital cutting after migration: when are interventions justified?
title Baseline data from a planned RCT on attitudes to female genital cutting after migration: when are interventions justified?
title_full Baseline data from a planned RCT on attitudes to female genital cutting after migration: when are interventions justified?
title_fullStr Baseline data from a planned RCT on attitudes to female genital cutting after migration: when are interventions justified?
title_full_unstemmed Baseline data from a planned RCT on attitudes to female genital cutting after migration: when are interventions justified?
title_short Baseline data from a planned RCT on attitudes to female genital cutting after migration: when are interventions justified?
title_sort baseline data from a planned rct on attitudes to female genital cutting after migration: when are interventions justified?
topic Global Health
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5724060/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28801440
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017506
work_keys_str_mv AT wahlberganna baselinedatafromaplannedrctonattitudestofemalegenitalcuttingaftermigrationwhenareinterventionsjustified
AT johnsdottersara baselinedatafromaplannedrctonattitudestofemalegenitalcuttingaftermigrationwhenareinterventionsjustified
AT sellingkatarinaekholm baselinedatafromaplannedrctonattitudestofemalegenitalcuttingaftermigrationwhenareinterventionsjustified
AT kallestalcarina baselinedatafromaplannedrctonattitudestofemalegenitalcuttingaftermigrationwhenareinterventionsjustified
AT essenbirgitta baselinedatafromaplannedrctonattitudestofemalegenitalcuttingaftermigrationwhenareinterventionsjustified