BACKGROUND: General practitioners (GPs) encounter women suffering from premenstrual symptoms. Often women with premenstrual problems experience little understanding from GPs. Views of GPs will influence their approach to these women and their care. Insight into these views is lacking but could help in designing educational programmes for GPs. OBJECTIVES: To explore the views of Dutch GPs towards aetiology, diagnostic process, and preferred treatment of premenstrual symptoms. METHODS: In 2017, we conducted a qualitative, semi-structured, interview survey among 27 GPs, varying in age, gender, and practice setting. RESULTS: Important themes emerged from the interviews: 'no need for a symptom diary,' 'PMS defined as illness' exclusively in case of disruption of normal functioning, and 'symptomatic treatment' as preferred approach. Most GPs considered PMS to be a physiological phenomenon, with taking history as an adequate diagnostic tool. Almost all GPs regarded a normal cyclical hormonal cycle as causal; many also mentioned the combination with personal sensitivity. Some pointed to a dividing line between physiological condition and illness if women could not function normally in daily life. Lastly, the approach GPs preferred was focussing on relieving symptoms of individual patients. In addition to explaining the hormonal cycle and lifestyle advice, all GPs advocated oral contraceptives, and if necessary psychological support. GPs expressed negative feelings about prescribing antidepressants. CONCLUSION: GPs considered physiological changes and personal sensitivity as aetiological factors. We recommend more training to improve GPs knowledge and more insight into the burden of women with PMS. A symptom diary is an essential diagnostic tool for GPs.
BACKGROUND: General practitioners (GPs) encounter women suffering from premenstrual symptoms. Often women with premenstrual problems experience little understanding from GPs. Views of GPs will influence their approach to these women and their care. Insight into these views is lacking but could help in designing educational programmes for GPs. OBJECTIVES: To explore the views of Dutch GPs towards aetiology, diagnostic process, and preferred treatment of premenstrual symptoms. METHODS: In 2017, we conducted a qualitative, semi-structured, interview survey among 27 GPs, varying in age, gender, and practice setting. RESULTS: Important themes emerged from the interviews: 'no need for a symptom diary,' 'PMS defined as illness' exclusively in case of disruption of normal functioning, and 'symptomatic treatment' as preferred approach. Most GPs considered PMS to be a physiological phenomenon, with taking history as an adequate diagnostic tool. Almost all GPs regarded a normal cyclical hormonal cycle as causal; many also mentioned the combination with personal sensitivity. Some pointed to a dividing line between physiological condition and illness if women could not function normally in daily life. Lastly, the approach GPs preferred was focussing on relieving symptoms of individual patients. In addition to explaining the hormonal cycle and lifestyle advice, all GPs advocated oral contraceptives, and if necessary psychological support. GPs expressed negative feelings about prescribing antidepressants. CONCLUSION: GPs considered physiological changes and personal sensitivity as aetiological factors. We recommend more training to improve GPs knowledge and more insight into the burden of women with PMS. A symptom diary is an essential diagnostic tool for GPs.
Entities:
Keywords:
PMS; PMS aetiology; Premenstrual syndrome; general practitioner; qualitative interview
Authors: Lee S Cohen; Cherri Miner; Eileen W Brown; Ellen Freeman; Uriel Halbreich; Karen Sundell; Susan McCray Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2002-09 Impact factor: 7.661