Article

Pelvic examinations in asymptomatic women: tipping a sacred cow.

Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology & Productive Science, University of California, San Francisco, CA 94143, USA.
Archives of internal medicine (Impact Factor: 13.25). 12/2011; 171(22):2054-5. DOI: 10.1001/archinternmed.2011.567
Source: PubMed
1 Follower
 · 
91 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective With newer recommendations for less frequent cervical cancer screening, longer intervals between routine gynecologic examinations might also be considered. Methods A nationally-representative mailed survey of U.S. obstetrician-gynecologists (n = 521, response rate 62%) was conducted in 2010–11. Clinicians were asked their views on annual gynecologic examinations and on the consequences of extending the interval from annually to every 3 years for asymptomatic patients. Results Over two-thirds considered annual gynecologic examination very important for women in their reproductive years (69%); fewer consider it very important for women in menopause (55%). Most anticipated that shifting examinations to every 3 years would result in lower patient satisfaction (78%), contraceptive provision (74%), and patient health and well-being (74%). Decreases in clinic volume (93%) and financial reimbursement (78%) were also expected. Anticipated effects of longer intervals varied by provider characteristics, geography, and practice setting. Conclusion Obstetrician-gynecologists in the U.S. believed longer intervals between routine examinations would have negative repercussions for patients and medical practice, but there were differences by region, practice, and personal characteristics. Redefining annual gynecologic visits as contraceptive counseling and health maintenance visits could address financial and patient volume concerns, and perspectives from patients and other providers might reveal possible benefits of less frequent gynecologic examinations.
    Preventive Medicine 05/2014; 62. DOI:10.1016/j.ypmed.2014.02.004 · 2.93 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Adolescents' experiences of their first pelvic examination (external inspection, speculum examination and bimanual palpation) may have a marked influence on future experiences; why examination techniques and strategies for creating a positive experience of this situation need to be developed. This review addresses to what extent that ambition is reflected in recent literature. The majority of articles on 'pelvic examination during adolescence' come from the United States, which skews the review's perspective. Several researchers recommend using investigations based on new technology rather than a pelvic examination when medical indications for a full examination are present. The profession's attitudes toward annual check-ups and pelvic examinations (in the United States) are currently debated, for teens as well as for adults.How to perform a first pelvic examination on an adolescent is not often discussed, nor are strategies for creating a positive experience of this event.The contexts in which a first pelvic examination is performed probably differ among societies. The Swedish and the US contexts are compared as an illustration; for example preventive healthcare and sex education is in Sweden the responsibility of schools, open for anybody and without admission fees. Recent literature does not mirror a need for developing examination techniques and strategies for creating a positive experience of the first pelvic examination, nor for exploiting its maximal potential as a positive rite of passage.The ongoing US debate on indications for pelvic examinations and annual check-ups is even more relevant for adolescents, in whom contraindications need to be considered.
    Current opinion in obstetrics & gynecology 10/2013; 25(5):357-63. DOI:10.1097/GCO.0b013e3283642b8a · 2.37 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: •Bimanual examinations are not an effective screening tool in asymptomatic well women.•The bimanual exam is not recommended for cancer screening, sexually transmitted infection testing, or prior to initiation of contraception.•Clinicians continue to perform the bimanual exam despite evidence-based rationale as to its futility.•The greatest harm generated by pelvic exams is the detection of false-positive pathology.
    The Journal for Nurse Practitioners 09/2014; 10(8). DOI:10.1016/j.nurpra.2014.06.009