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...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
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 |