人们讨论的是无法勃起的男性,那么无法插入的女性呢?性疼痛-插入障碍的女性求助经历

IF 1.8 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH SSM. Qualitative research in health Pub Date : 2024-09-03 DOI:10.1016/j.ssmqr.2024.100480
Rashmi Pithavadian , Jane Chalmers , Vijayasarathi Ramanathan , Tinashe Dune
{"title":"人们讨论的是无法勃起的男性,那么无法插入的女性呢?性疼痛-插入障碍的女性求助经历","authors":"Rashmi Pithavadian ,&nbsp;Jane Chalmers ,&nbsp;Vijayasarathi Ramanathan ,&nbsp;Tinashe Dune","doi":"10.1016/j.ssmqr.2024.100480","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>While it is common to hear of men who ‘can't get it up’ due to erectile dysfunction, people rarely discuss the women who ‘can't get it in’. These women often meet the criteria for sexual pain-penetration disorder (SPPD), which makes vaginal penetration painful or difficult. Lacking awareness of SPPD and the changing terminology from vaginismus to SPPD complicates help-seeking. Yet, there is lacking research on women's help-seeking experiences for SPPD. Therefore, this study aimed to examine Australian women's subjective experiences of formal and informal help-seeking for their SPPD to gain information, diagnosis, treatment, and support.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Help-seeking theory informed the study. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 21 participants who sought help for their SPPD, which were inductively thematically analysed.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Five major themes were developed. (1) <em>Recognition that help-seeking is necessary</em> varied depending on participants' presentation of SPPD. (2) <em>Initiating help-seeking</em> included accessing first points of contact and gaining diagnosis. (3) <em>Management of symptoms with treatment</em> involved conventional, complementary, and alternative treatments. Women discussed using sex toys as alternatives to vaginal trainers, the correlation between negotiating pain thresholds and treatment progress, and their perceptions towards Botox and nerve blocks. (4) <em>Traverse formal healthcare networks</em> facilitated or hindered help-seeking. (5) <em>Navigation of un/supportive informal networks</em> included women's partners, family, friends, and online communities.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The benefit of self-help kits, and complementary and alternative treatments for SPPD should be evaluated. Recommendations involve improving health professionals' approaches, including in online spaces. Women's immediate informal support networks should be engaged in healthcare management.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":74862,"journal":{"name":"SSM. Qualitative research in health","volume":"6 ","pages":"Article 100480"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667321524000891/pdfft?md5=3f58fde8d42d7bf6c3b47f6adf7ebdcd&pid=1-s2.0-S2667321524000891-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"People discuss the men who can't get it up, but what about the women who can't get it in? Women's help-seeking experiences for sexual pain-penetration disorder\",\"authors\":\"Rashmi Pithavadian ,&nbsp;Jane Chalmers ,&nbsp;Vijayasarathi Ramanathan ,&nbsp;Tinashe Dune\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ssmqr.2024.100480\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>While it is common to hear of men who ‘can't get it up’ due to erectile dysfunction, people rarely discuss the women who ‘can't get it in’. These women often meet the criteria for sexual pain-penetration disorder (SPPD), which makes vaginal penetration painful or difficult. Lacking awareness of SPPD and the changing terminology from vaginismus to SPPD complicates help-seeking. Yet, there is lacking research on women's help-seeking experiences for SPPD. Therefore, this study aimed to examine Australian women's subjective experiences of formal and informal help-seeking for their SPPD to gain information, diagnosis, treatment, and support.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Help-seeking theory informed the study. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 21 participants who sought help for their SPPD, which were inductively thematically analysed.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Five major themes were developed. (1) <em>Recognition that help-seeking is necessary</em> varied depending on participants' presentation of SPPD. (2) <em>Initiating help-seeking</em> included accessing first points of contact and gaining diagnosis. (3) <em>Management of symptoms with treatment</em> involved conventional, complementary, and alternative treatments. Women discussed using sex toys as alternatives to vaginal trainers, the correlation between negotiating pain thresholds and treatment progress, and their perceptions towards Botox and nerve blocks. (4) <em>Traverse formal healthcare networks</em> facilitated or hindered help-seeking. (5) <em>Navigation of un/supportive informal networks</em> included women's partners, family, friends, and online communities.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The benefit of self-help kits, and complementary and alternative treatments for SPPD should be evaluated. Recommendations involve improving health professionals' approaches, including in online spaces. Women's immediate informal support networks should be engaged in healthcare management.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74862,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"SSM. Qualitative research in health\",\"volume\":\"6 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100480\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667321524000891/pdfft?md5=3f58fde8d42d7bf6c3b47f6adf7ebdcd&pid=1-s2.0-S2667321524000891-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"SSM. Qualitative research in health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667321524000891\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SSM. Qualitative research in health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667321524000891","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的人们常听到男性因勃起功能障碍而 "硬不起来",却很少讨论女性 "插不进去 "的问题。这些女性通常符合性疼痛-插入障碍(SPPD)的标准,这使得阴道插入疼痛或困难。由于缺乏对 SPPD 的认识,以及从阴道炎到 SPPD 的术语变化,使得寻求帮助变得更加复杂。然而,目前还缺乏有关妇女就 SPPD 寻求帮助的经历的研究。因此,本研究旨在探讨澳大利亚妇女为获得信息、诊断、治疗和支持而正式和非正式寻求 SPPD 帮助的主观经历。对 21 名因 SPPD 而寻求帮助的参与者进行了半结构式访谈,并对访谈结果进行了归纳式主题分析。(1) 对求助必要性的认识因参与者的 SPPD 表现而异。(2) 开始寻求帮助包括与第一联系人联系和获得诊断。(3) 通过治疗来控制症状包括常规治疗、辅助治疗和替代治疗。妇女们讨论了使用性玩具替代阴道训练器、疼痛阈值协商与治疗进展之间的相关性,以及她们对肉毒杆菌毒素和神经阻滞的看法。(4) 穿越正规医疗网络促进或阻碍了求助。(5) 不支持/支持性非正式网络包括妇女的伴侣、家人、朋友和网络社区。建议改进医疗专业人员的方法,包括在网络空间中的方法。妇女的直接非正式支持网络应参与医疗保健管理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
People discuss the men who can't get it up, but what about the women who can't get it in? Women's help-seeking experiences for sexual pain-penetration disorder

Purpose

While it is common to hear of men who ‘can't get it up’ due to erectile dysfunction, people rarely discuss the women who ‘can't get it in’. These women often meet the criteria for sexual pain-penetration disorder (SPPD), which makes vaginal penetration painful or difficult. Lacking awareness of SPPD and the changing terminology from vaginismus to SPPD complicates help-seeking. Yet, there is lacking research on women's help-seeking experiences for SPPD. Therefore, this study aimed to examine Australian women's subjective experiences of formal and informal help-seeking for their SPPD to gain information, diagnosis, treatment, and support.

Methods

Help-seeking theory informed the study. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 21 participants who sought help for their SPPD, which were inductively thematically analysed.

Results

Five major themes were developed. (1) Recognition that help-seeking is necessary varied depending on participants' presentation of SPPD. (2) Initiating help-seeking included accessing first points of contact and gaining diagnosis. (3) Management of symptoms with treatment involved conventional, complementary, and alternative treatments. Women discussed using sex toys as alternatives to vaginal trainers, the correlation between negotiating pain thresholds and treatment progress, and their perceptions towards Botox and nerve blocks. (4) Traverse formal healthcare networks facilitated or hindered help-seeking. (5) Navigation of un/supportive informal networks included women's partners, family, friends, and online communities.

Conclusions

The benefit of self-help kits, and complementary and alternative treatments for SPPD should be evaluated. Recommendations involve improving health professionals' approaches, including in online spaces. Women's immediate informal support networks should be engaged in healthcare management.

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
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
163 days
期刊最新文献
A qualitative study of sources of knowledge in individuals with hoarding disorder: The impact of media depictions and social comparisons Perspectives of Palestinian physicians on the impact of the Gaza War in the West Bank “I am forced to just give it to her because she is the one who wants it”: A qualitative study of providers’ perspectives on contraceptive counseling in Tanzania Prenatal care in urban China: Qualitative study on challenges and coping mechanisms Ableism in mental healthcare settings: A qualitative study among U.S. adults with disabilities
×
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