Importance of demographic characteristics and nurses' role in women's perceptions and experiences of gynaecological examination
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14528/snr.2015.49.2.44Keywords:
nursing, empathy, patients’ rights, reproductive health, gynecologyAbstract
Introduction: Gynaecological examination is crucial for protecting the reproductive health of women. The purpose of the study was to explore the perception of women towards gynaecological examination, the importance of some demographic characteristics and the role of a nurse. Methods: A quantitative methodology was used for study purposes. A structured web questionnaire was applied on a non-random, convenience sample of women (n = 476). The questionnaire was published on the most popular Slovenian web forums. Prior to the main research project, a pilot study was conducted on a sample of 10 women. The statistical analysis included descriptive statistics, t-test, Pearson's and Spearman's correlation coefficient. Results: Results of the study show a statistically significant correlation between the respondents' residential environment (t = -2.436, p = 0.015), the level of educational attainment (rs=-0.153, p = 0.001) and the presence of discomfort and fear before the gynaecological examination. The role of a nurse in reducing the level of discomfort and fear before (t = -0.931, p = 0.352) and during (t = -0.888, p = 0.375) the gynaecological examination was not proven statistically significant. Discussion and conclusions: Besides the demographic characteristics, a number of personal and societal factors influence women's attitudes towards gynaecological examination and the associated discomfort and fear. The study suggests that further qualitative studies are needed to gain a deeper understanding of how women experience a pelvic examination.
Downloads
Metrics
References
Burns, N. & Grove, S.K., 2009. The practice of nursing research: appraisal, synthesis, and generation of evidence. 6th ed. St. Louis: Saunders Elsevier, pp. 355–356.
Committee on Gynecologic Practice, 2012. Practice bulletin no. 534: well-woman visit. Obstetrics & Gynecology, 120(2), pp. 421–424. PMid: 22825111
Drife, J. & Magowan, B.A., 2004. Clinical obstetrics and gynaecology: history and examination. London: Saunders, pp. 87–96.
Fiddes, P., Scott, A., Fletcher, J. & Glasier, A., 2003. Attitudes towards pelvic examination and chaperones: a questionnaire survey of patients and providers. Contraception, 67(4), pp. 313–317. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0010-7824(02)00540-1 PMid: 2684154
Foucault, M., 2009. Rojstvo klinike. Ljubljana: Študentska založba, pp. 162–184.
Grundstrӧm, H., Wallin, K. & Berterӧ, C., 2011. »You expose yourself in so many ways«: young women's experinces of pelvic examination. Journal of Psychosomatic Obstetrics & Gynecology, 32(2), pp. 59–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/0167482X.2011.560692 PMid:21381979
Henderson, T.J., Yu, M.J., Harper, C.C. & Sawaya, F.G., 2014. U.S. clinicians' perspectives on less frequent routine gynecologic examinations. Preventive Medicine, 62, pp. 49–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2014.02.004 PMid: 24518004
Hilden, M., Sidenius, K., Langhoff-Roos, J., Wijma, B. & Schei, B., 2003. Women's experiences of the gynecologic examination: factors associated with discomfort. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica, 82(11), pp. 1030–1036. http://dx.doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0412.2003.00253.x PMid:14616277
Hill, D.A. & Lamvu, G., 2012. Effect of lubricating gel on patient comfort during vaginal speculum examination: a randomized controlled trial. Obstetrics & Gynecology, 119(2 Pt 1), pp. 227–231. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e3182426275 PMid:22270273
Ivanuš, U. & Primic Žakelj, M., 2014. Presejanje za raka materničnega vratu doma pri neodzivnicah programa ZORA. In: Štemberger Kolnik, T., et al. eds. Zdravstvena nega v javnem zdravstvu: zbornik prispevkov z recenzijo. Druga znanstvena konferenca z mednarodno udeležbo, Izola, 31. januar 2014. Koper: Založba Univerze na Primorskem, pp. 115–125.
Kincheloe, L.R., 2004. Gender bias against male obstetrician–gynecologists in women's magazines. Obstetrics & Gynecology, 104(5 Pt 1), pp. 1089–1093. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/01.AOG.0000142715.30202.6e PMid:15516406
Lewin, D., Fearon, B., Hemmings, V. & Johnson, G., 2005. Informing women during vaginal examinations. British Journal of Midwifery, 13(1), pp. 26–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.12968/bjom.2005.13.1.17318
Marinič, M., 2012. Zasebnost in dostojanstvo pacienta. Obzornik zdravstvene nege, 46(3), pp. 237–243.
Oscarsson, M.G., Benzein, E.G. & Wijma, B.E., 2007. The first pelvic examination. Journal of Psychosomatic Obstetrics & Gynecology, 28(1), pp. 7–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01674820601035136 PMid:17454509
Prosen, M. & Tavčar Krajnc, M., 2013. Sociological conceptualization of the medicalization of pregnancy and childbirth: the implications in Slovenia. Revija za sociologiju, 43(3), pp. 251–272. http://dx.doi.org/10.5613/rzs.43.3.3
Qaseem, A., Humphrey, L.L., Harris, R., Starkey, M. & Denberg, T.D., 2014. Screening pelvic examination in adult women: a clinical practice guideline from the American college of physicians. Annals of Internal Medicine, 161(1), pp. 67–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.7326/M14-0701 PMid:24979451
Racz, J.M., Srikanthan, A., Philip M.H. & Reid, R.L., 2008. Gender preference for a female physician diminishes as women have increased experience with intimate examinations. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada, 30(10), pp. 910–917. PMid:19038076
Ricciardi, R., 2008. The first pelvic examination in the adolescent: an update. The Journal for Nurse Practitioners, 4(5), pp. 377-383. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nurpra.2008.02.019
Rizk, E.E.D., El-Zubeir, M.A., Al-Dhaheri, A.M., Al-Mansouri, F.R.& Al-Jenaibi, H.S., 2005. Determinants of women's choice of their obstetrician and gynecologist provider in the UAE. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica, 84(1), pp. 48–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.0001-6349.2005.00705.x PMid:15603567
Sandelowski, M., 2000. This most dangerous instrument: propriety, power, and the vaginal speculum. Journal of Obstetric, Gynecologic & Neonatal Nursing, 29(1), pp. 73-82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1552-6909.2000.tb02759.x PMid:10660279
Starešinič, A., & Mihelič Zajec, A., 2014. Odnos deklet do prvega ginekološkega pregleda in vloga medicinske sestre pri oblikovanju tega odnosa. In: Filej, B. ed. Študenti zdravstvenih ved prispevajo k zdravju družbe: zbornik prispevkov z recenzijo. 6. študentska konferenca s področja zdravstvenih ved, Murska Sobota, 30. maj 2014. Maribor: Alma Mater Europaea, Evropski center, pp. 333–341.
Stewart, M., 2005. "I'm just going to wash you down": sanitizing the vaginal examination. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 51(6), pp. 587–594. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2005.03543.x PMid:16129009
Sudduth, A. & Linton, D., 2011. Gynecologic care of women with disabilities: implications for nurses. Nursing for Women's Health, 15(2), pp. 138–147. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-486X.2011.01622.x PMid:21504548
Swahnberg, K., Wijma, B. & Siwe, K., 2011. Strong discomfort during vaginal examination: why consider a history of abuse? European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology, 157(2), pp. 200–205. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2011.02.025 PMid:21470763
Tabak, N. & Ozon, M., 2004. The influence of nurses' attitudes, subjective norms and perceived behavioral control on maintaining patients' privacy in a hospital setting. Nursing Ethics, 11(4), pp. 366−377. PMid:15253572
Trojar, Š. & Ramšak Pajk, J., 2013. Nekateri vidiki doživljanja žensk ob operativnem posegu na rodilih: študija primera. Obzornik zdravstvene nege, 47(1), pp. 56–61.
Wendt, E., Fridlund, B. & Lidell, E., 2004. Trust and confirmation in a gynecologic examination situation: a critical incident technique analysis. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica, 83(12), pp. 1208-1215. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.0001-6349.2004.00597.x PMid: 15548158
Yanikkerem, E., Özdemir, M., Bingol, H., Tatar, A. & Karadeniz, G., 2009. Women's attitudes and expectations regarding gynaecological examination. Midwifery, 25(5), pp. 500–508. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2007.08.006 PMid: 18086509; PMCid:PMC2801597
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
As the author undersigned hereby, I transfer, assign, or otherwise convey the following authorship rights as comprised in the Copyright and Related Rights Act (CRRA) to the Slovenian Nursing Review, Ob železnici 30A, 1000 Ljubljana: the right of reproduction - the exclusive right to fix the work in a material medium or in another copy directly or indirectly, temporarily or permanently, by any means and in any digital form, in whole or in part (CRRA, Article 23); the right of distribution (CRRA, Article 24); the right of making a work available and accessible through the internet (CRRA, Article 32a); the right of transformation, especially the exclusive right to translate a pre-existing work (CRRA, Article 33). The transfer of author rights applies to the article in its entirety, including pictorial and/or graphic works and possible supplements. The transfer of rights is exclusive and unlimited in duration or territory.
