Barriers to diagnosing and treating vulval lichen sclerosus: a survey study.

IF 5.3 2区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL British Journal of General Practice Pub Date : 2024-11-08 DOI:10.3399/BJGP.2024.0360
Arabella Crew, Rheanne Leatherland, Louise Clarke, Caroline Owen, Rosalind Simpson
{"title":"Barriers to diagnosing and treating vulval lichen sclerosus: a survey study.","authors":"Arabella Crew, Rheanne Leatherland, Louise Clarke, Caroline Owen, Rosalind Simpson","doi":"10.3399/BJGP.2024.0360","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Background  Vulval lichen sclerosus (VLS) is a chronic inflammatory condition that is frequently misdiagnosed and under-recognised. To date, qualitative research focuses on lived experience of VLS, with women attributing diagnostic delay to poor interactions with health care professionals (HCPs) often due to lack of knowledge. In the UK, women with VLS are most likely to present to primary care.  Aim  To establish HCPs perspectives on identification, management and education of vulval skin disease, with a focus on VLS.  Design and Setting  A survey was distributed to HCPs working in primary care.  Method The survey was distributed via professional networks and at events. Analysis comprised of descriptive statistics, Spearman's rank correlations, and thematic analysis.  Results   Of 122 respondents, 53 were General Practitioners (GPs) and 59 were GP trainees. 37.7% of respondents had never participated in teaching nor learning on vulval skin disease. Confidence in the identification of vulval skin disease positively correlated with experience, exposure and female gender. The top identified barriers to diagnosis and treatment included lack of knowledge, embarrassment, and absence of VLS diagnostic criteria. Almost all participants (97.5%) felt VLS diagnostic criteria would be helpful in clinical practice.  Conclusion   This study provides insight into the barriers to diagnosing and treating VLS in primary care. HCPs recognise deficiencies in training, referral pathways and lack of tools to support VLS diagnosis. Training should include skills to address stigma and embarrassment. This study highlights the importance of developing interventions to overcome barriers, expediting diagnosis and treatment, such as reproducible diagnostic criteria.</p>","PeriodicalId":55320,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of General Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of General Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGP.2024.0360","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background  Vulval lichen sclerosus (VLS) is a chronic inflammatory condition that is frequently misdiagnosed and under-recognised. To date, qualitative research focuses on lived experience of VLS, with women attributing diagnostic delay to poor interactions with health care professionals (HCPs) often due to lack of knowledge. In the UK, women with VLS are most likely to present to primary care.  Aim  To establish HCPs perspectives on identification, management and education of vulval skin disease, with a focus on VLS.  Design and Setting  A survey was distributed to HCPs working in primary care.  Method The survey was distributed via professional networks and at events. Analysis comprised of descriptive statistics, Spearman's rank correlations, and thematic analysis.  Results   Of 122 respondents, 53 were General Practitioners (GPs) and 59 were GP trainees. 37.7% of respondents had never participated in teaching nor learning on vulval skin disease. Confidence in the identification of vulval skin disease positively correlated with experience, exposure and female gender. The top identified barriers to diagnosis and treatment included lack of knowledge, embarrassment, and absence of VLS diagnostic criteria. Almost all participants (97.5%) felt VLS diagnostic criteria would be helpful in clinical practice.  Conclusion   This study provides insight into the barriers to diagnosing and treating VLS in primary care. HCPs recognise deficiencies in training, referral pathways and lack of tools to support VLS diagnosis. Training should include skills to address stigma and embarrassment. This study highlights the importance of developing interventions to overcome barriers, expediting diagnosis and treatment, such as reproducible diagnostic criteria.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
诊断和治疗外阴硬皮病的障碍:一项调查研究。
背景外阴硬皮病(VLS)是一种慢性炎症,经常被误诊,而且认识不足。迄今为止,定性研究主要集中在 VLS 患者的生活体验方面,女性患者往往由于缺乏相关知识而将诊断延误归咎于与医疗保健专业人员(HCPs)的不良互动。在英国,患有 VLS 的妇女最有可能向初级保健机构求诊。目的 确定医护人员对外阴皮肤病的识别、管理和教育的看法,重点是 VLS。设计和设置 向从事初级保健工作的保健医生发放调查问卷。方法 通过专业网络和活动分发调查问卷。分析包括描述性统计、斯皮尔曼等级相关性和主题分析。结果 在 122 名受访者中,53 名是全科医生(GP),59 名是全科医生实习生。37.7%的受访者从未参加过有关外阴皮肤病的教学或学习。识别外阴皮肤病的信心与经验、接触和女性性别呈正相关。诊断和治疗的主要障碍包括缺乏知识、尴尬和缺乏外阴皮肤病诊断标准。几乎所有参与者(97.5%)都认为 VLS 诊断标准有助于临床实践。结论 本研究深入探讨了在初级保健中诊断和治疗 VLS 的障碍。初级保健人员认识到在培训、转诊途径和缺乏支持 VLS 诊断的工具方面存在不足。培训应包括解决耻辱感和尴尬的技能。本研究强调了制定干预措施以克服障碍、加快诊断和治疗的重要性,例如可重复的诊断标准。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
British Journal of General Practice
British Journal of General Practice 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
10.20%
发文量
681
期刊介绍: The British Journal of General Practice is an international journal publishing research, editorials, debate and analysis, and clinical guidance for family practitioners and primary care researchers worldwide. BJGP began in 1953 as the ‘College of General Practitioners’ Research Newsletter’, with the ‘Journal of the College of General Practitioners’ first appearing in 1960. Following the change in status of the College, the ‘Journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners’ was launched in 1967. Three editors later, in 1990, the title was changed to the ‘British Journal of General Practice’. The journal is commonly referred to as the ''BJGP'', and is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners.
期刊最新文献
Future Health Today: A pragmatic cluster randomised trial of quality improvement activities in general practice for patients at risk of undiagnosed cancer. Lived experiences of end-of-life care at home in the UK: a scoping review of qualitative research. What helps or hinders the communication of poor prognosis between secondary and primary care? A systematic review with narrative synthesis. Relationship between research activity and the performance of English general practices: cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses. Challenges to quality in contemporary, hybrid general practice: a multi-site longitudinal case study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1