Current attitudes on self-use and prescription of hormone therapy among New York City gynaecologists.

Menopause international Pub Date : 2013-09-01 Epub Date: 2013-05-21 DOI:10.1177/1754045313478941
Gayatri Devi, Fumitaka Sugiguchi, Anette Tønnes Pedersen, Dana Abrassart, Michele Glodowski, Lila Nachtigall
{"title":"Current attitudes on self-use and prescription of hormone therapy among New York City gynaecologists.","authors":"Gayatri Devi,&nbsp;Fumitaka Sugiguchi,&nbsp;Anette Tønnes Pedersen,&nbsp;Dana Abrassart,&nbsp;Michele Glodowski,&nbsp;Lila Nachtigall","doi":"10.1177/1754045313478941","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The results of the Women's Health Initiative studies dramatically altered hormone therapy use around the world. In countries outside the United States, self-use in physicians remained unaltered while prescription use declined, implying that physicians may not concur with the findings. We wished to explore prevailing attitudes among American physicians by examining New York City obstetrician-gynaecologists' self-use and prescription use of hormone therapy.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>All board-certified obstetrician-gynaecologists in New York City were invited to complete and return a detailed, previously validated questionnaire concerning hormone therapy use.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Two hundred and nine questionnaires were returned, for a response rate of 12% (209/1797). Gynaecologists agreed with the findings from the Women's Health Initiative studies regarding indications and contraindications to hormone therapy use. Even so, three-quarters of female gynaecologists and female partners of male gynaecologists (74%; 67/91) use or have previously used hormone therapy. However, only 27.3% (21/77) of male gynaecologists and 12.3% (14/114) of female gynaecologists recommend hormone therapy to all menopausal women regardless of contraindications. Gynaecologists remain divided in their attitude toward hormone therapy; 30% of gynaecologists felt that hormone therapy use generally prolonged women's lives, 36% felt it was not useful in prolonging women's lives, and 33% were unsure.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Since the publication of the Women's Health Initiative findings, New York City gynaecologists prescribe hormone therapy to fewer patients. However, they continue to self-use hormone therapy at much higher rates, even as they seem to concur with Women's Health Initiative recommendations, contributing to the ongoing controversy surrounding the validity of the Women's Health Initiative findings.</p>","PeriodicalId":87478,"journal":{"name":"Menopause international","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1754045313478941","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Menopause international","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1754045313478941","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2013/5/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

Objective: The results of the Women's Health Initiative studies dramatically altered hormone therapy use around the world. In countries outside the United States, self-use in physicians remained unaltered while prescription use declined, implying that physicians may not concur with the findings. We wished to explore prevailing attitudes among American physicians by examining New York City obstetrician-gynaecologists' self-use and prescription use of hormone therapy.

Study design: All board-certified obstetrician-gynaecologists in New York City were invited to complete and return a detailed, previously validated questionnaire concerning hormone therapy use.

Results: Two hundred and nine questionnaires were returned, for a response rate of 12% (209/1797). Gynaecologists agreed with the findings from the Women's Health Initiative studies regarding indications and contraindications to hormone therapy use. Even so, three-quarters of female gynaecologists and female partners of male gynaecologists (74%; 67/91) use or have previously used hormone therapy. However, only 27.3% (21/77) of male gynaecologists and 12.3% (14/114) of female gynaecologists recommend hormone therapy to all menopausal women regardless of contraindications. Gynaecologists remain divided in their attitude toward hormone therapy; 30% of gynaecologists felt that hormone therapy use generally prolonged women's lives, 36% felt it was not useful in prolonging women's lives, and 33% were unsure.

Conclusion: Since the publication of the Women's Health Initiative findings, New York City gynaecologists prescribe hormone therapy to fewer patients. However, they continue to self-use hormone therapy at much higher rates, even as they seem to concur with Women's Health Initiative recommendations, contributing to the ongoing controversy surrounding the validity of the Women's Health Initiative findings.

纽约市妇科医生对自我使用和激素治疗处方的态度。
目的:妇女健康倡议研究的结果极大地改变了世界各地激素治疗的使用。在美国以外的国家,医生的自我使用保持不变,而处方使用下降,这意味着医生可能不同意研究结果。我们希望通过调查纽约市妇产科医生对激素治疗的自我使用和处方使用,来探讨美国医生的普遍态度。研究设计:邀请纽约市所有经委员会认证的妇产科医生填写并返回一份详细的、先前有效的关于激素治疗使用的问卷。结果:共回收问卷209份,回复率为12%(209/1797)。妇科医生同意妇女健康倡议关于激素治疗适应症和禁忌症的研究结果。即便如此,四分之三的女性妇科医生和男性妇科医生的女性伴侣(74%;67/91)正在使用或曾经使用过激素治疗。然而,只有27.3%(21/77)的男性妇科医生和12.3%(14/114)的女性妇科医生建议对所有绝经期妇女进行激素治疗,而不考虑禁忌症。妇科医生对激素疗法的态度仍然存在分歧;30%的妇科医生认为激素疗法的使用通常延长了女性的生命,36%的人认为它对延长女性的生命没有用,33%的人不确定。结论:自从妇女健康倡议的研究结果发表以来,纽约市的妇科医生给更少的病人开了激素治疗的处方。然而,他们继续以更高的比例自我使用激素治疗,即使他们似乎同意妇女健康倡议的建议,这也导致了围绕妇女健康倡议研究结果有效性的持续争议。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信