Article

Experience and attitude of interns to pelvic and sensitive area examinations during their undergraduate medical course.

Division of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery (37), King Saud University, PO Box 7805, Riyadh 11427, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
Saudi medical journal (Impact Factor: 0.62). 05/2012; 33(5):551-6.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To explore the experience of interns in sensitive area examination during their undergraduate medical course and identify factors interfering with such examinations.
A cross sectional study was carried out from May to June 2010. Interns (n=315) at King Saud University College of Medicine were invited via email to complete a web-based questionnaire developed using surveymonkey.com.
Out of 315 interns, 211 completed the questionnaire; 60% males and 40% females. The mean percentage of interns who never performed any of these examinations was 28.9% for digital rectal examination, 17.5% for breast, 43.1% for female pelvic examination, 13.3% for inguinal (hernia), and 34.6% for male external genitalia. Compared to females, male students conducted more rectal examinations (87 versus 63, p<0.005), and male external genitalia examinations (112 versus 26, p<0.001). On the other hand, compared to male students, females conducted more pelvic examination (68 versus 52, p=0.03) and breast examinations (92 versus 82, p=0.27). The most common reasons for not performing sensitive area examinations included patient's refusal (33.1%), and examining patients of opposite gender (27.6%). Confidence in performance of these examinations was correlated to increased frequency of the examination.
This study highlights that most common factors interfering with the students' conducting sensitive area examinations are patient's refusal and examining patients of the opposite sex. There is a strong correlation between increased frequency of conducting an examination and student's confidence in performance.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
60 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: [Purpose] This study aimed at evaluating PT interns' performance from the perspectives of clinical and academic physical therapists (PTs). [Methods] An online questionnaire based on a modified version of the Clinical Internship Evaluation Tool (CIET) was used to evaluate PT interns' performance in patient management skills. Assessors comprised clinical and academic PTs from Saudi Arabia. The survey aimed at assessing the competency of interns in 25 patient management skills comprising four major domains: clinical examination, patient evaluation, diagnosis and prognosis, and intervention. Assessors were also asked to rank the importance of possessing each skill and evaluating the internship programs at their facilities. A multivariate logistic regression analysis assessed whether the demographic variables between the two groups influenced their views. [Results] A total of 148 participants (112 clinical PTs and 36 academic PTs) responded to the survey. The majority of the participants agreed that interns were competent in all 25 skills. Differences between the two groups of assessors were observed for five out of the 25 skills. Interestingly, skills with the highest means were perceived as the most important skills by both groups of assessors. There was no association between sociodemographic variables and evaluation scores. [Conclusion] There were no differences observed between clinical and academic PTs in their evaluation of PT interns in 20 of the 25 clinical skills. There were indications of a need for further improvement in certain competencies and skills such as clinical examination, evaluation, diagnosis and prognosis, and intervention.
    Journal of Physical Therapy Science 05/2013; 25(5):649-655. · 0.18 Impact Factor