Literature DB >> 22484240

Physician characteristics and beliefs associated with use of pelvic examinations in asymptomatic women.

Analía Romina Stormo1, Crystale Purvis Cooper, Nikki A Hawkins, Mona Saraiya.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To examine physicians' beliefs about the pelvic examination and identify physician characteristics associated with routine use of this procedure in the United States.
METHODS: A total of 1250 United States family/general practitioners, internists, and obstetrician/gynecologists who participated in the 2009 DocStyles survey completed questions on beliefs regarding the utility of routine pelvic examinations for cancer screening. The survey also asked participants how often they performed this procedure as part of a well-woman exam, to screen for ovarian and other gynecologic cancers, to screen for sexually transmitted infections, and as a prerequisite for prescribing hormonal contraception.
RESULTS: A total of 68.0% of obstetrician/gynecologists, 39.2% of family/general practitioners, and 18.7% of internists reported routinely performing pelvic examinations for all the purposes examined (<0.001). Adjusted analyses revealed that the factors most strongly associated with use of pelvic examinations for all purposes were being an obstetrician/gynecologist (odds ratio 8.5; 95% confidence interval 5.8-12.6) and believing that this procedure is useful to screen for gynecologic cancers (odds ratio 3.8; 95% confidence interval 2.6-5.5).
CONCLUSION: Misconceptions about the utility of pelvic examinations to screen for gynecologic cancers are common. More effective strategies to change physicians' beliefs regarding the value of performing pelvic examinations in asymptomatic women are needed. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22484240     DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2012.03.012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Prev Med        ISSN: 0091-7435            Impact factor:   4.018


  7 in total

Review 1.  Evolution of cervical cancer screening and prevention in United States and Canada: implications for public health practitioners and clinicians.

Authors:  M Saraiya; M Steben; M Watson; L Markowitz
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2013-02-08       Impact factor: 4.018

2.  A need for improved understanding about USPSTF and other evidence-based recommendations.

Authors:  Mona Saraiya; Vicki Benard; Mary White
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2014-01-02       Impact factor: 4.018

3.  Promoting gynecologic cancer awareness at a critical juncture--where women and providers meet.

Authors:  Crystale Purvis Cooper; Cynthia A Gelb; Juan Rodriguez; Nikki A Hawkins
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 2.037

4.  Routine bimanual pelvic examinations: practices and beliefs of US obstetrician-gynecologists.

Authors:  Jillian T Henderson; Cynthia C Harper; Sarah Gutin; Mona Saraiya; Jocelyn Chapman; George F Sawaya
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2012-11-22       Impact factor: 8.661

5.  Factors Affecting Gynecologic and Sexual Assessment in Older Women: A Lesson for Primary Care Providers.

Authors:  Ayasha Thomason; Natalie Capps; Leanne Lefler; Gloria Richard-Davis
Journal:  Healthcare (Basel)       Date:  2015-08-11

6.  The readiness of German GPs to recommend and conduct cancer screening is associated with patient-physician gender concordance. Results of a survey.

Authors:  Jennifer Engler; Anne Dahlhaus; Corina Güthlin
Journal:  Eur J Gen Pract       Date:  2016-11-14       Impact factor: 1.904

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

Authors:  Stefán Hjörleifsson; Bjørn Bjorvatn; Eivind Meland; Guri Rørtveit; Yngvild Hannestad; Gunnar Tschudi Bondevik
Journal:  Scand J Prim Health Care       Date:  2019-05-29       Impact factor: 2.581

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.