新西兰全科医生对子宫内膜异位症诊断、转诊、管理和指南的看法调查。

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Health Expectations Pub Date : 2024-09-02 DOI:10.1111/hex.70015
Katherine Ellis, Alina Meador, Anna Ponnampalam, Rachael Wood
{"title":"新西兰全科医生对子宫内膜异位症诊断、转诊、管理和指南的看法调查。","authors":"Katherine Ellis,&nbsp;Alina Meador,&nbsp;Anna Ponnampalam,&nbsp;Rachael Wood","doi":"10.1111/hex.70015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Introduction</h3>\n \n <p>There is a growing body of literature concerning endometriosis patients' perspectives on the healthcare system and endometriosis care in New Zealand. However, there is little research available on the perspectives of general practitioners (GPs) internationally, and none currently in New Zealand. The purpose of this study is to address New Zealand GPs' understanding of and approach to endometriosis diagnosis, referrals, management and guidelines.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods and Materials</h3>\n \n <p>An online, anonymous survey was shared with 869 GP clinics and completed by 185 New Zealand-based GPs regarding their awareness and application of the inaugural 2020 ‘Diagnosis and Management of Endometriosis in New Zealand’ guidelines, their perception of their endometriosis knowledge, the diagnostic value they assign to symptoms, the treatments they recommend and the reasons they refer patients to specialist gynaecologists. Differences between groups were conducted using Chi-squared tests, and text answers were assessed thematically using inductive, semantic coding.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>All 185 GPs had gynaecology consults, and 73% had gynaecology consults every week. Despite 65% being aware of the 2020 guidelines, only 35% overall had read them. Only 52% of GPs considered themselves to know enough about endometriosis for their routine practice. The most common treatment to be considered first line was intrauterine contraceptive devices (IUDs; 96%), whereas the most common alternative treatment recommended was exercise (69%). The most common reason for referral to specialist care was the failure of all attempted treatments (84%).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Many of the study's results align with current New Zealand and international endometriosis guidelines, particularly the prioritisation of progestin-only therapies, the reduced emphasis on surgical treatment as the first line and the low rates of alternative treatment recommendations. This study also highlights the need to improve awareness of inappropriate GP recommendations, including long-term treatment with prescription-only pain relief such as codeine and pregnancy for symptomatic relief.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Patient or Public Contribution</h3>\n \n <p>Two of the authors involved in the design and conduct of the study, data interpretation and manuscript preparation have sought care for endometriosis.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Trial Registration</h3>\n \n <p>NA</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":55070,"journal":{"name":"Health Expectations","volume":"27 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/hex.70015","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Survey of General Practitioner Perspectives on Endometriosis Diagnosis, Referrals, Management and Guidelines in New Zealand\",\"authors\":\"Katherine Ellis,&nbsp;Alina Meador,&nbsp;Anna Ponnampalam,&nbsp;Rachael Wood\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/hex.70015\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Introduction</h3>\\n \\n <p>There is a growing body of literature concerning endometriosis patients' perspectives on the healthcare system and endometriosis care in New Zealand. However, there is little research available on the perspectives of general practitioners (GPs) internationally, and none currently in New Zealand. The purpose of this study is to address New Zealand GPs' understanding of and approach to endometriosis diagnosis, referrals, management and guidelines.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods and Materials</h3>\\n \\n <p>An online, anonymous survey was shared with 869 GP clinics and completed by 185 New Zealand-based GPs regarding their awareness and application of the inaugural 2020 ‘Diagnosis and Management of Endometriosis in New Zealand’ guidelines, their perception of their endometriosis knowledge, the diagnostic value they assign to symptoms, the treatments they recommend and the reasons they refer patients to specialist gynaecologists. Differences between groups were conducted using Chi-squared tests, and text answers were assessed thematically using inductive, semantic coding.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>All 185 GPs had gynaecology consults, and 73% had gynaecology consults every week. Despite 65% being aware of the 2020 guidelines, only 35% overall had read them. Only 52% of GPs considered themselves to know enough about endometriosis for their routine practice. The most common treatment to be considered first line was intrauterine contraceptive devices (IUDs; 96%), whereas the most common alternative treatment recommended was exercise (69%). The most common reason for referral to specialist care was the failure of all attempted treatments (84%).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>Many of the study's results align with current New Zealand and international endometriosis guidelines, particularly the prioritisation of progestin-only therapies, the reduced emphasis on surgical treatment as the first line and the low rates of alternative treatment recommendations. This study also highlights the need to improve awareness of inappropriate GP recommendations, including long-term treatment with prescription-only pain relief such as codeine and pregnancy for symptomatic relief.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Patient or Public Contribution</h3>\\n \\n <p>Two of the authors involved in the design and conduct of the study, data interpretation and manuscript preparation have sought care for endometriosis.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Trial Registration</h3>\\n \\n <p>NA</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55070,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Expectations\",\"volume\":\"27 5\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/hex.70015\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Expectations\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/hex.70015\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Expectations","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/hex.70015","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导言:关于子宫内膜异位症患者对新西兰医疗系统和子宫内膜异位症治疗的看法的文献越来越多。然而,国际上关于全科医生(GPs)观点的研究很少,新西兰目前也没有这方面的研究。本研究旨在探讨新西兰全科医生对子宫内膜异位症诊断、转诊、管理和指南的理解和方法:我们与 869 家全科医生诊所共享了一项在线匿名调查,共有 185 名新西兰全科医生填写了调查问卷,内容涉及他们对 2020 年 "新西兰子宫内膜异位症诊断与管理 "指南的认识和应用、他们对自己子宫内膜异位症知识的看法、他们对症状的诊断价值、他们推荐的治疗方法以及他们将患者转诊至妇科专科医生的原因。组间差异采用卡方检验,文本答案采用归纳式语义编码法进行主题评估:所有 185 名全科医生都有妇科咨询,73% 的全科医生每周都有妇科咨询。尽管 65% 的全科医生知道 2020 年指南,但只有 35% 的全科医生阅读过该指南。只有 52% 的全科医生认为自己对子宫内膜异位症有足够的了解,能够胜任日常工作。最常见的一线治疗是宫内避孕器(IUDs,96%),而最常见的替代治疗是运动(69%)。转诊到专科医生的最常见原因是所有尝试的治疗方法都失败了(84%):这项研究的许多结果与新西兰和国际子宫内膜异位症指南相一致,尤其是优先考虑仅使用孕激素的疗法、减少对手术治疗作为一线治疗的强调以及替代治疗建议的低比例。这项研究还强调,有必要提高人们对不适当的全科医生建议的认识,包括长期使用可待因等处方止痛药治疗和为缓解症状而怀孕:参与研究设计和实施、数据解释和手稿撰写的两位作者曾就诊于子宫内膜异位症:不适用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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
Survey of General Practitioner Perspectives on Endometriosis Diagnosis, Referrals, Management and Guidelines in New Zealand

Introduction

There is a growing body of literature concerning endometriosis patients' perspectives on the healthcare system and endometriosis care in New Zealand. However, there is little research available on the perspectives of general practitioners (GPs) internationally, and none currently in New Zealand. The purpose of this study is to address New Zealand GPs' understanding of and approach to endometriosis diagnosis, referrals, management and guidelines.

Methods and Materials

An online, anonymous survey was shared with 869 GP clinics and completed by 185 New Zealand-based GPs regarding their awareness and application of the inaugural 2020 ‘Diagnosis and Management of Endometriosis in New Zealand’ guidelines, their perception of their endometriosis knowledge, the diagnostic value they assign to symptoms, the treatments they recommend and the reasons they refer patients to specialist gynaecologists. Differences between groups were conducted using Chi-squared tests, and text answers were assessed thematically using inductive, semantic coding.

Results

All 185 GPs had gynaecology consults, and 73% had gynaecology consults every week. Despite 65% being aware of the 2020 guidelines, only 35% overall had read them. Only 52% of GPs considered themselves to know enough about endometriosis for their routine practice. The most common treatment to be considered first line was intrauterine contraceptive devices (IUDs; 96%), whereas the most common alternative treatment recommended was exercise (69%). The most common reason for referral to specialist care was the failure of all attempted treatments (84%).

Conclusions

Many of the study's results align with current New Zealand and international endometriosis guidelines, particularly the prioritisation of progestin-only therapies, the reduced emphasis on surgical treatment as the first line and the low rates of alternative treatment recommendations. This study also highlights the need to improve awareness of inappropriate GP recommendations, including long-term treatment with prescription-only pain relief such as codeine and pregnancy for symptomatic relief.

Patient or Public Contribution

Two of the authors involved in the design and conduct of the study, data interpretation and manuscript preparation have sought care for endometriosis.

Trial Registration

NA

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Health Expectations
Health Expectations 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
9.40%
发文量
251
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Health Expectations promotes critical thinking and informed debate about all aspects of patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) in health and social care, health policy and health services research including: • Person-centred care and quality improvement • Patients'' participation in decisions about disease prevention and management • Public perceptions of health services • Citizen involvement in health care policy making and priority-setting • Methods for monitoring and evaluating participation • Empowerment and consumerism • Patients'' role in safety and quality • Patient and public role in health services research • Co-production (researchers working with patients and the public) of research, health care and policy Health Expectations is a quarterly, peer-reviewed journal publishing original research, review articles and critical commentaries. It includes papers which clarify concepts, develop theories, and critically analyse and evaluate specific policies and practices. The Journal provides an inter-disciplinary and international forum in which researchers (including PPIE researchers) from a range of backgrounds and expertise can present their work to other researchers, policy-makers, health care professionals, managers, patients and consumer advocates.
期刊最新文献
Exploring Barriers and Facilitators to Patients and Members of the Public Contributing to Rapid Health Technology Assessments for NICE: A Qualitative Study. 'The Letter Says I May or May Not Be Eligible… It Is a Big Doubt and Frustrating:' A Qualitative Study on Barriers and Facilitators to Children's Oral Healthcare From the Perspective of Karen Refugee Parents in Victoria. Beyond the Queue: Exploring Waiting Practices in the Stories of Patients With Breast Cancer Consumer Involvement in the Design and Development of Medication Safety Interventions or Services in Primary Care: A Scoping Review Shared Decision-Making and Body Mass Index in Australian Antenatal Care: An Exploratory OPTION12 Evaluation
×
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