Preference for In-Person Chaperone During Pelvic Exam Is Associated With Social Determinants of Health

IF 2.5 Q2 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
A. Hornbach, Thomas E. Nichols, Tara Samsel, Rong Shi, Kimberly Kenton, Sarah Collins
{"title":"Preference for In-Person Chaperone During Pelvic Exam Is Associated With Social Determinants of Health","authors":"A. Hornbach, Thomas E. Nichols, Tara Samsel, Rong Shi, Kimberly Kenton, Sarah Collins","doi":"10.1097/aog.0000000000005851.51","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"INTRODUCTION: Women’s healthcare requires awareness of how social determinants of health (SDH) impact patient safety and quality of care. Because of the effects of institutional racism and past discrimination, race is an important SDH in gynecology. In parallel with increased recognition of the importance of SDH, attention to measures of patient safety during clinical exams has heightened. While ACOG has long recognized the importance of providing an in-person chaperone during pelvic examinations for patients who prefer to have one, CMS only recently made provisions to cover the expense of an in-person chaperone. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the desire for a chaperone during pelvic examination is associated with SDH in a large, transregional, and diverse university-based urogynecology practice. METHODS: After institutional leadership recognized the importance of offering patients in-person chaperones for pelvic examinations, our multisite, academic urogynecology practice modified its electronic intake questionnaire, accessed through the health system-wide electronic medical record. All patients were queried using the following item regarding preference for a chaperone during their pelvic examinations: “When you come into the office for an in-person visit and undergo a pelvic examination, would you prefer to have an extra person, or chaperone, present in the room?” This retrospective review of new patients to the practice from May 23 to July 17, 2024, evaluates the medical and demographic factors associated with an answer of “yes” to this question. Descriptive statistics are presented. Categorical data were compared using chi-square and Fisher exact tests as appropriate. All variables that were significant in univariate analysis were entered into a backwards logistic regression model. p<.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Of 401 new patients to the practice during the study period, 390 (97%) patients completed the intake question about chaperone preference. Their ages were (mean±SD) 58±16.6 years old with PFDI-20 scores of 82±52.2. The population self-identified as White (74%), Black (20%), other race (6%); 7.5% identified as Hispanic or Latino. See Table 1 for additional medical and demographic information. 74/390, 19.1%, indicated that they preferred to have a chaperone present during their pelvic examination. On univariate analysis, 14.6% of White patients compared to 27.4% of Black patients and 36.8% of other races (p=.007) preferred a chaperone. Similarly, non-Hispanic/Latino patients were less likely to prefer a chaperone than Hispanic/Latino patients (40% vs 16.2%, p=.014). More patients seeing a male than female physician (34.7% vs 16.7%, p=.005), and more patients with government insurance than private insurance (25.5% vs 14.6%, p=.009) desired a chaperone. On multivariable logistic regression, Black race (p=.028), Hispanic/Latino ethnicity (p=.017), and male physician gender (p=.004) remained independently associated with preference for a chaperone during pelvic exam. CONCLUSIONS: Women who identify as Black and/or Hispanic/Latino are more likely to prefer a chaperone during pelvic examinations than White, non-Hispanic women. As we identify resources to ensure patient safety with respect to SDH, it is essential to provide resources for in-person chaperones if desired by patients. More data is needed to drive efforts to promote equitable patient experiences in diverse clinical practices.","PeriodicalId":37602,"journal":{"name":"Obstetrics and Gynecology Science","volume":"145 5S","pages":"34S-35S"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Obstetrics and Gynecology Science","FirstCategoryId":"0","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/aog.0000000000005851.51","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Women’s healthcare requires awareness of how social determinants of health (SDH) impact patient safety and quality of care. Because of the effects of institutional racism and past discrimination, race is an important SDH in gynecology. In parallel with increased recognition of the importance of SDH, attention to measures of patient safety during clinical exams has heightened. While ACOG has long recognized the importance of providing an in-person chaperone during pelvic examinations for patients who prefer to have one, CMS only recently made provisions to cover the expense of an in-person chaperone. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the desire for a chaperone during pelvic examination is associated with SDH in a large, transregional, and diverse university-based urogynecology practice. METHODS: After institutional leadership recognized the importance of offering patients in-person chaperones for pelvic examinations, our multisite, academic urogynecology practice modified its electronic intake questionnaire, accessed through the health system-wide electronic medical record. All patients were queried using the following item regarding preference for a chaperone during their pelvic examinations: “When you come into the office for an in-person visit and undergo a pelvic examination, would you prefer to have an extra person, or chaperone, present in the room?” This retrospective review of new patients to the practice from May 23 to July 17, 2024, evaluates the medical and demographic factors associated with an answer of “yes” to this question. Descriptive statistics are presented. Categorical data were compared using chi-square and Fisher exact tests as appropriate. All variables that were significant in univariate analysis were entered into a backwards logistic regression model. p<.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Of 401 new patients to the practice during the study period, 390 (97%) patients completed the intake question about chaperone preference. Their ages were (mean±SD) 58±16.6 years old with PFDI-20 scores of 82±52.2. The population self-identified as White (74%), Black (20%), other race (6%); 7.5% identified as Hispanic or Latino. See Table 1 for additional medical and demographic information. 74/390, 19.1%, indicated that they preferred to have a chaperone present during their pelvic examination. On univariate analysis, 14.6% of White patients compared to 27.4% of Black patients and 36.8% of other races (p=.007) preferred a chaperone. Similarly, non-Hispanic/Latino patients were less likely to prefer a chaperone than Hispanic/Latino patients (40% vs 16.2%, p=.014). More patients seeing a male than female physician (34.7% vs 16.7%, p=.005), and more patients with government insurance than private insurance (25.5% vs 14.6%, p=.009) desired a chaperone. On multivariable logistic regression, Black race (p=.028), Hispanic/Latino ethnicity (p=.017), and male physician gender (p=.004) remained independently associated with preference for a chaperone during pelvic exam. CONCLUSIONS: Women who identify as Black and/or Hispanic/Latino are more likely to prefer a chaperone during pelvic examinations than White, non-Hispanic women. As we identify resources to ensure patient safety with respect to SDH, it is essential to provide resources for in-person chaperones if desired by patients. More data is needed to drive efforts to promote equitable patient experiences in diverse clinical practices.
盆腔检查中对亲自陪同的偏好与健康的社会决定因素有关
妇女保健需要了解健康的社会决定因素(SDH)如何影响患者安全和护理质量。由于体制性种族主义和过去歧视的影响,种族是妇科重要的SDH。随着对SDH重要性认识的提高,对临床检查期间患者安全措施的关注也有所提高。虽然ACOG长期以来一直认识到在盆腔检查期间为愿意接受陪护的患者提供陪护的重要性,但CMS直到最近才规定支付陪护费用。目的:在一个大型的、跨地区的、多样化的大学泌尿妇科实践中,确定盆腔检查中对伴侣的渴望是否与SDH有关。方法:在机构领导认识到为患者提供盆腔检查陪同的重要性后,我们的多站点、学术泌尿妇科实践修改了其电子摄入问卷,通过卫生系统范围内的电子病历访问。所有患者都被问及在盆腔检查时是否愿意有陪护人员:“当你来到办公室进行面对面的盆腔检查时,你更愿意有一个额外的人或陪护人员在场吗?”这项对2024年5月23日至7月17日新患者的回顾性研究评估了与这个问题的回答“是”相关的医学和人口因素。给出了描述性统计。分类数据的比较酌情使用卡方检验和Fisher精确检验。所有在单变量分析中显著的变量都被输入到一个反向逻辑回归模型中。P < 0.05认为有统计学意义。结果:在研究期间401名新患者中,390名(97%)患者完成了关于伴侣偏好的摄入问题。年龄(mean±SD) 58±16.6岁,PFDI-20评分82±52.2分。人口自我认同为白人(74%),黑人(20%),其他种族(6%);7.5%为西班牙裔或拉丁裔。更多的医疗和人口信息见表1。74/390(19.1%)表示他们更喜欢在盆腔检查时有伴侣在场。在单变量分析中,14.6%的白人患者比27.4%的黑人患者和36.8%的其他种族患者(p=.007)更喜欢伴侣。同样,非西班牙裔/拉丁裔患者比西班牙裔/拉丁裔患者更不喜欢监护人(40% vs 16.2%, p= 0.014)。看男性医生的患者多于看女性医生的患者(34.7% vs 16.7%, p= 0.005),有政府保险的患者多于有私人保险的患者(25.5% vs 14.6%, p= 0.009)希望有陪护人员。在多变量logistic回归中,黑人种族(p= 0.028)、西班牙裔/拉丁裔种族(p= 0.017)和男性医生性别(p= 0.004)仍然与骨盆检查时伴侣的偏好独立相关。结论:与白人、非西班牙裔女性相比,黑人和/或西班牙裔/拉丁裔女性在盆腔检查时更倾向于有伴侣陪同。当我们确定资源以确保SDH方面的患者安全时,如果患者需要,为亲自陪伴者提供资源是必不可少的。需要更多的数据来推动在不同临床实践中促进公平的患者体验的努力。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
Obstetrics and Gynecology Science
Obstetrics and Gynecology Science Medicine-Obstetrics and Gynecology
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
15.80%
发文量
58
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Obstetrics & Gynecology Science (NLM title: Obstet Gynecol Sci) is an international peer-review journal that published basic, translational, clinical research, and clinical practice guideline to promote women’s health and prevent obstetric and gynecologic disorders. The journal has an international editorial board and is published in English on the 15th day of every other month. Submitted manuscripts should not contain previously published material and should not be under consideration for publication elsewhere. The journal has been publishing articles since 1958. The aim of the journal is to publish original articles, reviews, case reports, short communications, letters to the editor, and video articles that have the potential to change the practices in women''s health care. The journal’s main focus is the diagnosis, treatment, prediction, and prevention of obstetric and gynecologic disorders. Because the life expectancy of Korean and Asian women is increasing, the journal''s editors are particularly interested in the health of elderly women in these population groups. The journal also publishes articles about reproductive biology, stem cell research, and artificial intelligence research for women; additionally, it provides insights into the physiology and mechanisms of obstetric and gynecologic diseases.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书