Chloé Roullier1, Sophie Sanguin2, Camille Parent2, Mélyne Lombart2, Fabrice Sergent3, Arthur Foulon4. 1. Département de médecine générale, Faculté de Médecine, Université Picardie Jules Verne, 3 rue des Louvels, 80000 Amiens, France. 2. Service de gynécologie et d'obstétrique, CHU Amiens Picardie, 1 Bd du Pr Christian Cabrol, 80054 Amiens, France. 3. Service de gynécologie et d'obstétrique, CHU Amiens Picardie, 1 Bd du Pr Christian Cabrol, 80054 Amiens, France; Faculté de Médecine, Université Picardie Jules Verne, 3 rue des Louvels, 80000 Amiens, France. 4. Service de gynécologie et d'obstétrique, CHU Amiens Picardie, 1 Bd du Pr Christian Cabrol, 80054 Amiens, France. Electronic address: foulon.arthur@chu-amiens.fr.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess general practitioners' (GPs') knowledge of and practice in the diagnosis and management of endometriosis following the publication of updated French national guidelines in 2017. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A descriptive, anonymous, epidemiological survey of 102 GPs in the Picardie region of France. RESULTS: Only 25% of the GPs considered that they knew enough about endometriosis for their routine clinical practice. This proportion was 58.9% amongst GPs with an university diploma in gynaecology and 31.4% amongst those participating in continuing medical education courses on gynaecology. Only 19.6% of the GPs were aware of the updated French national guidelines. With regard to five main suggestive, localizing signs of endometriosis, dyspareunia, dysmenorrhoea and infertility were mentioned as being of diagnostic value by 55.9%, 37.3% and 43.1% of the GPs, respectively; in contrast, functional urinary tract disorders and painful defecation were not mentioned very often. GPs with a qualification in gynaecology and those participating in continuing medical education in gynaecology knew more about treating endometriosis. CONCLUSION: In the Picardie region of France, GPs appear to be only moderately aware of how to manage endometriosis; this probably contributes to the diagnostic delay associated with this condition. GPs with a university diploma in gynaecology and those participating in continuing medical education in gynaecology appeared to have a better grasp of the subject. Continuing medical education on this topic should therefore be promoted and expanded.
OBJECTIVE: To assess general practitioners' (GPs') knowledge of and practice in the diagnosis and management of endometriosis following the publication of updated French national guidelines in 2017. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A descriptive, anonymous, epidemiological survey of 102 GPs in the Picardie region of France. RESULTS: Only 25% of the GPs considered that they knew enough about endometriosis for their routine clinical practice. This proportion was 58.9% amongst GPs with an university diploma in gynaecology and 31.4% amongst those participating in continuing medical education courses on gynaecology. Only 19.6% of the GPs were aware of the updated French national guidelines. With regard to five main suggestive, localizing signs of endometriosis, dyspareunia, dysmenorrhoea and infertility were mentioned as being of diagnostic value by 55.9%, 37.3% and 43.1% of the GPs, respectively; in contrast, functional urinary tract disorders and painful defecation were not mentioned very often. GPs with a qualification in gynaecology and those participating in continuing medical education in gynaecology knew more about treating endometriosis. CONCLUSION: In the Picardie region of France, GPs appear to be only moderately aware of how to manage endometriosis; this probably contributes to the diagnostic delay associated with this condition. GPs with a university diploma in gynaecology and those participating in continuing medical education in gynaecology appeared to have a better grasp of the subject. Continuing medical education on this topic should therefore be promoted and expanded.