Cargando…

The when and how of the gynaecological examination: a survey among Norwegian general practitioners

Introduction: Little is known about the indications general practitioners (GPs) perceive as relevant for performing gynaecological examinations (GEs), how GPs master the GE and associated procedures, and how they handle the sensitive nature of GEs. Methods: In 2015, 70 medical students at the Univer...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hjörleifsson, Stefán, Bjorvatn, Bjørn, Meland, Eivind, Rørtveit, Guri, Hannestad, Yngvild, Tschudi Bondevik, Gunnar
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Taylor & Francis 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6567104/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31140330
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02813432.2019.1619829
_version_ 1783426999792959488
author Hjörleifsson, Stefán
Bjorvatn, Bjørn
Meland, Eivind
Rørtveit, Guri
Hannestad, Yngvild
Tschudi Bondevik, Gunnar
author_facet Hjörleifsson, Stefán
Bjorvatn, Bjørn
Meland, Eivind
Rørtveit, Guri
Hannestad, Yngvild
Tschudi Bondevik, Gunnar
author_sort Hjörleifsson, Stefán
collection PubMed
description Introduction: Little is known about the indications general practitioners (GPs) perceive as relevant for performing gynaecological examinations (GEs), how GPs master the GE and associated procedures, and how they handle the sensitive nature of GEs. Methods: In 2015, 70 medical students at the University of Bergen distributed a questionnaire to all 175 GPs in the practices they visited. The questions covered practical routines related to GEs, insertion of intrauterine device, frequency of GEs in different clinical settings and use of assisting personnel. Statistical analyses included chi-square tests and multiple logistic regressions adjusting for age, gender, specialization and localization. Results: Ninety male and 61 female GPs (87% of invited GPs) responded to the questionnaire. A minority (8%) usually had other staff present during GEs. Compared with female colleagues, male GPs performed bimanual palpation significantly less often in connection with routine Pap smear (AOR 0.3 (95% CI 0.1-0.6)). Twenty-eight percent of the GPs stated that they often/always omitted the GE if the patient was anxious about GE and 35% when the patient asked for referral to a gynaecologist. Omission was more frequent among male GPs. When the GP decided to refer to a gynaecologist based on the patient’s symptoms, more male than female GPs omitted GE (AOR 2.5 (95% CI 1.1-5.4)). Conclusion: Male gender of the GP may be associated with barriers to medical evaluation of pelvic symptoms in women, potentially leading to substandard care. Possibly, however, male GPs’ reluctance to perform the GE may also limit unnecessary bimanual palpation in asymptomatic women.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6567104
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Taylor & Francis
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-65671042019-06-21 The when and how of the gynaecological examination: a survey among Norwegian general practitioners Hjörleifsson, Stefán Bjorvatn, Bjørn Meland, Eivind Rørtveit, Guri Hannestad, Yngvild Tschudi Bondevik, Gunnar Scand J Prim Health Care Research Article Introduction: Little is known about the indications general practitioners (GPs) perceive as relevant for performing gynaecological examinations (GEs), how GPs master the GE and associated procedures, and how they handle the sensitive nature of GEs. Methods: In 2015, 70 medical students at the University of Bergen distributed a questionnaire to all 175 GPs in the practices they visited. The questions covered practical routines related to GEs, insertion of intrauterine device, frequency of GEs in different clinical settings and use of assisting personnel. Statistical analyses included chi-square tests and multiple logistic regressions adjusting for age, gender, specialization and localization. Results: Ninety male and 61 female GPs (87% of invited GPs) responded to the questionnaire. A minority (8%) usually had other staff present during GEs. Compared with female colleagues, male GPs performed bimanual palpation significantly less often in connection with routine Pap smear (AOR 0.3 (95% CI 0.1-0.6)). Twenty-eight percent of the GPs stated that they often/always omitted the GE if the patient was anxious about GE and 35% when the patient asked for referral to a gynaecologist. Omission was more frequent among male GPs. When the GP decided to refer to a gynaecologist based on the patient’s symptoms, more male than female GPs omitted GE (AOR 2.5 (95% CI 1.1-5.4)). Conclusion: Male gender of the GP may be associated with barriers to medical evaluation of pelvic symptoms in women, potentially leading to substandard care. Possibly, however, male GPs’ reluctance to perform the GE may also limit unnecessary bimanual palpation in asymptomatic women. Taylor & Francis 2019-05-29 /pmc/articles/PMC6567104/ /pubmed/31140330 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02813432.2019.1619829 Text en © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Hjörleifsson, Stefán
Bjorvatn, Bjørn
Meland, Eivind
Rørtveit, Guri
Hannestad, Yngvild
Tschudi Bondevik, Gunnar
The when and how of the gynaecological examination: a survey among Norwegian general practitioners
title The when and how of the gynaecological examination: a survey among Norwegian general practitioners
title_full The when and how of the gynaecological examination: a survey among Norwegian general practitioners
title_fullStr The when and how of the gynaecological examination: a survey among Norwegian general practitioners
title_full_unstemmed The when and how of the gynaecological examination: a survey among Norwegian general practitioners
title_short The when and how of the gynaecological examination: a survey among Norwegian general practitioners
title_sort when and how of the gynaecological examination: a survey among norwegian general practitioners
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6567104/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31140330
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02813432.2019.1619829
work_keys_str_mv AT hjorleifssonstefan thewhenandhowofthegynaecologicalexaminationasurveyamongnorwegiangeneralpractitioners
AT bjorvatnbjørn thewhenandhowofthegynaecologicalexaminationasurveyamongnorwegiangeneralpractitioners
AT melandeivind thewhenandhowofthegynaecologicalexaminationasurveyamongnorwegiangeneralpractitioners
AT rørtveitguri thewhenandhowofthegynaecologicalexaminationasurveyamongnorwegiangeneralpractitioners
AT hannestadyngvild thewhenandhowofthegynaecologicalexaminationasurveyamongnorwegiangeneralpractitioners
AT tschudibondevikgunnar thewhenandhowofthegynaecologicalexaminationasurveyamongnorwegiangeneralpractitioners
AT hjorleifssonstefan whenandhowofthegynaecologicalexaminationasurveyamongnorwegiangeneralpractitioners
AT bjorvatnbjørn whenandhowofthegynaecologicalexaminationasurveyamongnorwegiangeneralpractitioners
AT melandeivind whenandhowofthegynaecologicalexaminationasurveyamongnorwegiangeneralpractitioners
AT rørtveitguri whenandhowofthegynaecologicalexaminationasurveyamongnorwegiangeneralpractitioners
AT hannestadyngvild whenandhowofthegynaecologicalexaminationasurveyamongnorwegiangeneralpractitioners
AT tschudibondevikgunnar whenandhowofthegynaecologicalexaminationasurveyamongnorwegiangeneralpractitioners