Literature DB >> 12145592

Patient preferences for gender of endoscopists.

Shyam Varadarajulu1, Carol Petruff, William H Ramsey.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The preference of patients for physician gender has been studied in many areas of medicine, but it has not been well evaluated in those undergoing lower GI endoscopy. This study assessed patient preference, if any, for endoscopist gender and compared the degree of preference expressed by men and women.
METHODS: A total of 150 consecutive patients scheduled for colonoscopy were prospectively asked to complete 2 sets of questionnaires anonymously. The preprocedure questionnaire asked whether they had a preference for an endoscopist of one gender and attempted to assess the strength of any preference by their willingness to wait until an endoscopist of the preferred gender became available. The postprocedure questionnaire assessed durability of response by asking patients who had expressed a gender preference about a possible change in their attitudes after completion of the examination.
RESULTS: The response rate for completion of the questionnaire was 100% (80 women, 70 men). Among women, 45% (36/80) expressed a gender preference (34 for a female and 2 for a male endoscopist), whereas only 4.3% (3/70) of men expressed a preference (p < 0.001). More than 90% (32/34) of the women patients who had expressed a preprocedure gender choice said they were willing to wait until an endoscopist of the preferred gender was available. When questioned after the procedure, the attitudes of all patients who previously expressed a gender choice remained unchanged.
CONCLUSION: Compared with male patients, female patients are more likely to have gender preferences for an endoscopist.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12145592     DOI: 10.1016/s0016-5107(02)70173-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc        ISSN: 0016-5107            Impact factor:   9.427


  20 in total

1.  DDS Perspective: Reflections of a Woman in Gastroenterology.

Authors:  Sonia Friedman
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2019-10       Impact factor: 3.199

2.  Gender preference and implications for screening colonoscopy: impact of endoscopy nurses.

Authors:  Vui Heng Chong
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2012-07-21       Impact factor: 5.742

3.  Gender preference for the endoscopist among Hispanics: the results of a prospective study.

Authors:  Apurv Varia; Mihir K Patel; Rajasekhar Tanikella; Victor I Machicao; Michael B Fallon; Frank J Lukens
Journal:  J Immigr Minor Health       Date:  2014-10

4.  Change to FIT increased CRC screening rates: evaluation of a US screening outreach program.

Authors:  Elizabeth G Liles; Nancy Perrin; Ana Gabriela Rosales; Adrianne C Feldstein; David H Smith; David M Mosen; Jennifer L Schneider
Journal:  Am J Manag Care       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 2.229

5.  Patient Preference for Physician Gender in the Emergency Department.

Authors:  Haley A Nolen; Justin Xavier Moore; Joel B Rodgers; Henry E Wang; Lauren A Walter
Journal:  Yale J Biol Med       Date:  2016-06-27

6.  Uptake of population-based flexible sigmoidoscopy screening for colorectal cancer: a nurse-led feasibility study.

Authors:  Hannah Brotherstone; Maggie Vance; Robert Edwards; Anne Miles; Kathryn A Robb; Ruth E C Evans; Jane Wardle; Wendy Atkin
Journal:  J Med Screen       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 2.136

Review 7.  Determinants of patient choice of healthcare providers: a scoping review.

Authors:  Aafke Victoor; Diana M J Delnoij; Roland D Friele; Jany J D J M Rademakers
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2012-08-22       Impact factor: 2.908

8.  Gender differences in attitudes impeding colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  Paul Ritvo; Ronald E Myers; Lawrence Paszat; Mardie Serenity; Daniel F Perez; Linda Rabeneck
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2013-05-24       Impact factor: 3.295

9.  The preference for an endoscopist specific sex: a link between ethnic origin, religious belief, socioeconomic status, and procedure type.

Authors:  Adi Lahat; Yehudith Assouline-Dayan; Lior H Katz; Herma H Fidder
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2013-09-09       Impact factor: 2.711

10.  Use of a 12 months' self-referral reminder to facilitate uptake of bowel scope (flexible sigmoidoscopy) screening in previous non-responders: a London-based feasibility study.

Authors:  Robert S Kerrison; Lesley M McGregor; Sarah Marshall; John Isitt; Nicholas Counsell; Jane Wardle; Christian von Wagner
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2016-03-15       Impact factor: 7.640

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.