open access publication

Article, 2023

Danish women's preferences regarding gynecological examination support international recommendations: A cross‐sectional study

International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics, ISSN 1879-3479, 0020-7292, Volume 162, 3, Pages 1068-1076, 10.1002/ijgo.14828

Contributors

Laschke, Alexander D L 0000-0003-2348-6747 (Corresponding author) [1] [2] Blaakaer, Jan 0000-0003-3726-0589 [2] [3] Jensen, Charlotte Floridon [4] Larsen, Mette Bach 0000-0002-0727-5571 [5]

Affiliations

  1. [1] Speciallægeselskabet Alexander Laschke ApS, Aabenraa, Denmark
  2. [NORA names: Denmark; Europe, EU; Nordic; OECD];
  3. [2] University of Southern Denmark
  4. [NORA names: SDU University of Southern Denmark; University; Denmark; Europe, EU; Nordic; OECD];
  5. [3] Odense University Hospital
  6. [NORA names: Region of Southern Denmark; Hospital; Denmark; Europe, EU; Nordic; OECD];
  7. [4] Gynækologisk Klinik Holbæk, Holbæk, Denmark
  8. [NORA names: Denmark; Europe, EU; Nordic; OECD];
  9. [5] Regional Hospital Randers
  10. [NORA names: Central Denmark Region; Hospital; Denmark; Europe, EU; Nordic; OECD]

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Gynecological examinations (GEs) are challenging for many women. Several recommendations and guidelines have emerged, partly based on common sense and clinicians' consensus. However, there is a lack of knowledge regarding women's opinions. Therefore, this study aimed to describe women's preferences and experiences in relation to GEs and investigate whether they are dependent on their socioeconomic status. METHODS: In Denmark, GEs are typically performed by general practitioners or resident specialists in gynecology (RSGs) in gynecological hospital departments. This cross-sectional questionnaire and register study included approximately 3000 randomly selected patients who visited six RSGs from January 1, 2020, to March 1, 2021. The main outcome measurement involved women's preferences and experiences regarding GEs. RESULTS: Overall, 37% of the women thought that a changing room was important, 20% preferred a garment to cover themselves, 18% preferred a separate examination room, and 13% thought that the presence of a chaperone was important. Compared with working and retired women, more women outside the workforce felt insufficiently informed, considered their experience with RSGs unprofessional, and found GEs painful. CONCLUSION: Our results support existing recommendations regarding GEs and the related environment, confirming that privacy and modesty are factors to take into consideration as they are of concern for a relatively large group of women. Thus, providers should focus on women outside the workforce, because this group appears to feel vulnerable in this environment.

Keywords

Denmark, RSG, RSGs, chaperone, clinician consensus, clinicians, consensus, cross-sectional questionnaire, cross-sectional study, department, environment, examination, examination room, experiments, factors, garment, general practitioners, group, group of women, guidelines, gynecological examination, gynecology, hospital departments, international recommendations, knowledge, lack, lack of knowledge, measurements, modesty, opinion, outcome measures, outcomes, patients, practitioners, preferences, presence, privacy, providers, questionnaire, recommendations, register, register study, resident specialists, results, retired women, room, sensing, socioeconomic status, specialists, status, study, women, women's opinions, women's preferences, work, workforce

Data Provider: Digital Science