What influences GPs' use of pelvic examination? A qualitative investigation in primary care.


Journal

The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners
ISSN: 1478-5242
Titre abrégé: Br J Gen Pract
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9005323

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
07 2023
Historique:
received: 11 07 2022
accepted: 27 01 2023
medline: 3 7 2023
pubmed: 18 4 2023
entrez: 17 4 2023
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Omission of pelvic examination (PE) has been associated with diagnostic delay in women diagnosed with gynaecological cancer. However, PEs are often not carried out by GPs. To determine the perceptions of GPs about the role of PEs, the barriers to and facilitators of PEs, and GPs' experience of PEs in practice. Qualitative semi-structured interview study conducted in one health board in Scotland (mixed urban and rural) with an approximate population of 500 000. Interviews were conducted face-to-face or by telephone between March and June 2019. Framework analysis used the COM-B behaviour change model concepts of capability, opportunity, and motivation. Data was compatible with all three domains of the COM-B framework. Capability related to training in and maintenance of skills. These went beyond carrying out the examination to interpreting it reliably. Opportunity related to the clinical environment and the provision of chaperones for intimate examination. Interviewees described a range of motivations towards or against PEs that were unrelated to either capability or opportunity. These all related to providing high-quality care, but this was defined in different ways: 'doing what is best for the individual', 'doctors examine', and 'GPs as pragmatists'. GPs' reasons for carrying out, or not carrying out, PEs in women with symptoms potentially indicating cancer are complex. The COM-B framework provides a way of understanding this complexity. Interventions to increase the use of PEs, and critics of its non-use, need to consider these multiple factors.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Omission of pelvic examination (PE) has been associated with diagnostic delay in women diagnosed with gynaecological cancer. However, PEs are often not carried out by GPs.
AIM
To determine the perceptions of GPs about the role of PEs, the barriers to and facilitators of PEs, and GPs' experience of PEs in practice.
DESIGN AND SETTING
Qualitative semi-structured interview study conducted in one health board in Scotland (mixed urban and rural) with an approximate population of 500 000.
METHOD
Interviews were conducted face-to-face or by telephone between March and June 2019. Framework analysis used the COM-B behaviour change model concepts of capability, opportunity, and motivation.
RESULTS
Data was compatible with all three domains of the COM-B framework. Capability related to training in and maintenance of skills. These went beyond carrying out the examination to interpreting it reliably. Opportunity related to the clinical environment and the provision of chaperones for intimate examination. Interviewees described a range of motivations towards or against PEs that were unrelated to either capability or opportunity. These all related to providing high-quality care, but this was defined in different ways: 'doing what is best for the individual', 'doctors examine', and 'GPs as pragmatists'.
CONCLUSION
GPs' reasons for carrying out, or not carrying out, PEs in women with symptoms potentially indicating cancer are complex. The COM-B framework provides a way of understanding this complexity. Interventions to increase the use of PEs, and critics of its non-use, need to consider these multiple factors.

Identifiants

pubmed: 37068965
pii: BJGP.2022.0363
doi: 10.3399/BJGP.2022.0363
pmc: PMC10131233
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

e528-e536

Informations de copyright

© The Authors.

Auteurs

Pauline Williams (P)

Aberdeen Centre for Women's Health Research, Institute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen Maternity Hospital, Aberdeen.

Peter Murchie (P)

Academic Primary Care, Institute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen.

Maggie E Cruickshank (ME)

Aberdeen Centre for Women's Health Research, Institute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen Maternity Hospital, Aberdeen.

Christine M Bond (CM)

Academic Primary Care, Institute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen.

Christopher D Burton (CD)

Academic Unit of Primary Care, University of Sheffield, Sheffield.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH