Cargando…

Understanding what impacts on disclosing anal incontinence for women when comparing bowel-screening tools: a phenomenological study

BACKGROUND: There is limited research defining the true prevalence of anal incontinence (AI) in women of childbearing age. Understanding the limitations of the current assessment tools in the identification of AI is paramount for identifying the prevalence of AI and improving the care and management...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tucker, Julie, Murphy, Elizabeth Mary Ann, Steen, Mary, Clifton, Vicki L.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6873481/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31752828
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12905-019-0840-0
_version_ 1783472666657685504
author Tucker, Julie
Murphy, Elizabeth Mary Ann
Steen, Mary
Clifton, Vicki L.
author_facet Tucker, Julie
Murphy, Elizabeth Mary Ann
Steen, Mary
Clifton, Vicki L.
author_sort Tucker, Julie
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: There is limited research defining the true prevalence of anal incontinence (AI) in women of childbearing age. Understanding the limitations of the current assessment tools in the identification of AI is paramount for identifying the prevalence of AI and improving the care and management for women of childbearing age. The aim of this research was to explore and develop an understanding of women’s experiences in disclosing AI when completing a new bowel-screening questionnaire when compared to two established AI tools. METHODS: A phenomenological qualitative research study was undertaken in a maternity setting in a large tertiary hospital. Parous women in the first trimester of a subsequent pregnancy were recruited to complete a specifically designed screening tool (BSQ), St Marks Faecal incontinence score (Vaizey) and Cleveland (Wexner) score. Qualitative semi-structured interviews were utilised to identify experiences in disclosing AI. RESULTS: Women (n = 16, 22–42 years) with a history of anal incontinence either following the first birth (n = 12) or the second (n = 4) provided differing responses between the three assessment tools. All women answered the BSQ while the Vaizey and Wexner scores were more difficult to complete due to clinical language and participants level of comprehension. Women identified three major themes that were barriers for disclosing incontinence, which included social expectations, trusted space and confusion. CONCLUSION: There are barriers for disclosing AI in the pregnant and post-natal population, which can be improved with the use of an easy assessment tool. The BSQ may facilitate discussion on AI between the patient and health professional leading to earlier identification and improvement in short and long-term health outcomes.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6873481
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68734812019-12-12 Understanding what impacts on disclosing anal incontinence for women when comparing bowel-screening tools: a phenomenological study Tucker, Julie Murphy, Elizabeth Mary Ann Steen, Mary Clifton, Vicki L. BMC Womens Health Research Article BACKGROUND: There is limited research defining the true prevalence of anal incontinence (AI) in women of childbearing age. Understanding the limitations of the current assessment tools in the identification of AI is paramount for identifying the prevalence of AI and improving the care and management for women of childbearing age. The aim of this research was to explore and develop an understanding of women’s experiences in disclosing AI when completing a new bowel-screening questionnaire when compared to two established AI tools. METHODS: A phenomenological qualitative research study was undertaken in a maternity setting in a large tertiary hospital. Parous women in the first trimester of a subsequent pregnancy were recruited to complete a specifically designed screening tool (BSQ), St Marks Faecal incontinence score (Vaizey) and Cleveland (Wexner) score. Qualitative semi-structured interviews were utilised to identify experiences in disclosing AI. RESULTS: Women (n = 16, 22–42 years) with a history of anal incontinence either following the first birth (n = 12) or the second (n = 4) provided differing responses between the three assessment tools. All women answered the BSQ while the Vaizey and Wexner scores were more difficult to complete due to clinical language and participants level of comprehension. Women identified three major themes that were barriers for disclosing incontinence, which included social expectations, trusted space and confusion. CONCLUSION: There are barriers for disclosing AI in the pregnant and post-natal population, which can be improved with the use of an easy assessment tool. The BSQ may facilitate discussion on AI between the patient and health professional leading to earlier identification and improvement in short and long-term health outcomes. BioMed Central 2019-11-21 /pmc/articles/PMC6873481/ /pubmed/31752828 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12905-019-0840-0 Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Tucker, Julie
Murphy, Elizabeth Mary Ann
Steen, Mary
Clifton, Vicki L.
Understanding what impacts on disclosing anal incontinence for women when comparing bowel-screening tools: a phenomenological study
title Understanding what impacts on disclosing anal incontinence for women when comparing bowel-screening tools: a phenomenological study
title_full Understanding what impacts on disclosing anal incontinence for women when comparing bowel-screening tools: a phenomenological study
title_fullStr Understanding what impacts on disclosing anal incontinence for women when comparing bowel-screening tools: a phenomenological study
title_full_unstemmed Understanding what impacts on disclosing anal incontinence for women when comparing bowel-screening tools: a phenomenological study
title_short Understanding what impacts on disclosing anal incontinence for women when comparing bowel-screening tools: a phenomenological study
title_sort understanding what impacts on disclosing anal incontinence for women when comparing bowel-screening tools: a phenomenological study
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6873481/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31752828
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12905-019-0840-0
work_keys_str_mv AT tuckerjulie understandingwhatimpactsondisclosinganalincontinenceforwomenwhencomparingbowelscreeningtoolsaphenomenologicalstudy
AT murphyelizabethmaryann understandingwhatimpactsondisclosinganalincontinenceforwomenwhencomparingbowelscreeningtoolsaphenomenologicalstudy
AT steenmary understandingwhatimpactsondisclosinganalincontinenceforwomenwhencomparingbowelscreeningtoolsaphenomenologicalstudy
AT cliftonvickil understandingwhatimpactsondisclosinganalincontinenceforwomenwhencomparingbowelscreeningtoolsaphenomenologicalstudy