对澳大利亚大都市一家三级医院的妇产科医生进行调查,以了解他们对人工流产护理的看法、培训情况和信心。

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Laura C Phung, Joanne M Said, Aekta Neel
{"title":"对澳大利亚大都市一家三级医院的妇产科医生进行调查,以了解他们对人工流产护理的看法、培训情况和信心。","authors":"Laura C Phung, Joanne M Said, Aekta Neel","doi":"10.1111/ajo.13852","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The barriers to comprehensive abortion care in Australian metropolitan tertiary hospitals are under-researched. Previous work has suggested that negative practitioner attitudes and lack of training may play a large role; however, this remains poorly understood.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>The aim was to survey doctors practicing obstetrics and gynaecology to better understand their views, training experience and confidence in abortion care.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>The method involved a cross-sectional study via an anonymous survey at a single metropolitan tertiary hospital not providing substantive abortion services in Melbourne, Australia. Inclusion criterion was obstetric and gynaecology medical staff working at that hospital. Data were collected regarding views, training experiences and confidence in first-trimester medical and surgical abortion, and second-trimester surgical abortion. Data were analysed according to levels of training, categorised as RANZCOG (Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists) Fellows, prevocational/vocational trainees and general practitioner specialists.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sixty-one valid responses were received from 90 eligible participants (response rate 68%). An overwhelming majority (96%) supported abortion services. The majority of RANZCOG Fellows felt confident performing first-trimester surgical abortion (89%) and first-trimester medical abortion (71%); however, only half felt confident performing second-trimester surgical abortion (50%). Prevocational/vocational trainees were overall less confident but overwhelmingly expressed interest in gaining further experience in abortion.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Doctors are generally confident in providing first-trimester abortion services (medical or surgical) in the metropolitan tertiary setting. However, further work is required to understand ongoing barriers to comprehensive abortion care. There may also be a skills shortage for second-trimester surgical abortion, requiring significant improvements in abortion training.</p>","PeriodicalId":55429,"journal":{"name":"Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A survey of obstetric and gynaecology doctors at an Australian metropolitan tertiary hospital to understand their views, training and confidence in abortion care.\",\"authors\":\"Laura C Phung, Joanne M Said, Aekta Neel\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/ajo.13852\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The barriers to comprehensive abortion care in Australian metropolitan tertiary hospitals are under-researched. Previous work has suggested that negative practitioner attitudes and lack of training may play a large role; however, this remains poorly understood.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>The aim was to survey doctors practicing obstetrics and gynaecology to better understand their views, training experience and confidence in abortion care.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>The method involved a cross-sectional study via an anonymous survey at a single metropolitan tertiary hospital not providing substantive abortion services in Melbourne, Australia. Inclusion criterion was obstetric and gynaecology medical staff working at that hospital. Data were collected regarding views, training experiences and confidence in first-trimester medical and surgical abortion, and second-trimester surgical abortion. Data were analysed according to levels of training, categorised as RANZCOG (Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists) Fellows, prevocational/vocational trainees and general practitioner specialists.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sixty-one valid responses were received from 90 eligible participants (response rate 68%). An overwhelming majority (96%) supported abortion services. The majority of RANZCOG Fellows felt confident performing first-trimester surgical abortion (89%) and first-trimester medical abortion (71%); however, only half felt confident performing second-trimester surgical abortion (50%). Prevocational/vocational trainees were overall less confident but overwhelmingly expressed interest in gaining further experience in abortion.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Doctors are generally confident in providing first-trimester abortion services (medical or surgical) in the metropolitan tertiary setting. However, further work is required to understand ongoing barriers to comprehensive abortion care. There may also be a skills shortage for second-trimester surgical abortion, requiring significant improvements in abortion training.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55429,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/ajo.13852\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ajo.13852","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:对澳大利亚大都市三级医院提供全面人工流产护理的障碍研究不足。目的:本研究旨在对妇产科医生进行调查,以更好地了解他们对人工流产护理的看法、培训经验和信心:方法:在澳大利亚墨尔本的一家不提供实质性人工流产服务的大都市三级医院中,通过匿名调查进行横断面研究。纳入标准是在该医院工作的妇产科医务人员。收集的数据涉及对第一胎药物和手术流产以及第二胎手术流产的看法、培训经验和信心。数据根据培训级别进行分析,分为澳大利亚和新西兰皇家妇产科学院研究员、职前/职后培训生和全科医生专家:从 90 名符合条件的参与者中收到了 61 份有效回复(回复率为 68%)。绝大多数人(96%)支持人工流产服务。大多数新西兰皇家妇产科协会会员对实施第一胎手术流产(89%)和第一胎药物流产(71%)充满信心;但只有一半人对实施第二胎手术流产(50%)充满信心。职前/职业受训人员总体上信心不足,但绝大多数表示有兴趣获得更多人工流产方面的经验:结论:在大都市的三级医疗机构中,医生普遍对提供第一胎人工流产服务(内科或外科)充满信心。然而,还需要进一步开展工作,以了解目前在提供全面人工流产护理方面存在的障碍。第二孕期手术流产也可能存在技能短缺的问题,因此需要大力加强流产培训。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A survey of obstetric and gynaecology doctors at an Australian metropolitan tertiary hospital to understand their views, training and confidence in abortion care.

Background: The barriers to comprehensive abortion care in Australian metropolitan tertiary hospitals are under-researched. Previous work has suggested that negative practitioner attitudes and lack of training may play a large role; however, this remains poorly understood.

Aim: The aim was to survey doctors practicing obstetrics and gynaecology to better understand their views, training experience and confidence in abortion care.

Method: The method involved a cross-sectional study via an anonymous survey at a single metropolitan tertiary hospital not providing substantive abortion services in Melbourne, Australia. Inclusion criterion was obstetric and gynaecology medical staff working at that hospital. Data were collected regarding views, training experiences and confidence in first-trimester medical and surgical abortion, and second-trimester surgical abortion. Data were analysed according to levels of training, categorised as RANZCOG (Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists) Fellows, prevocational/vocational trainees and general practitioner specialists.

Results: Sixty-one valid responses were received from 90 eligible participants (response rate 68%). An overwhelming majority (96%) supported abortion services. The majority of RANZCOG Fellows felt confident performing first-trimester surgical abortion (89%) and first-trimester medical abortion (71%); however, only half felt confident performing second-trimester surgical abortion (50%). Prevocational/vocational trainees were overall less confident but overwhelmingly expressed interest in gaining further experience in abortion.

Conclusion: Doctors are generally confident in providing first-trimester abortion services (medical or surgical) in the metropolitan tertiary setting. However, further work is required to understand ongoing barriers to comprehensive abortion care. There may also be a skills shortage for second-trimester surgical abortion, requiring significant improvements in abortion training.

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
3.40
自引率
11.80%
发文量
165
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology (ANZJOG) is an editorially independent publication owned by the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RANZCOG) and the RANZCOG Research foundation. ANZJOG aims to provide a medium for the publication of original contributions to clinical practice and/or research in all fields of obstetrics and gynaecology and related disciplines. Articles are peer reviewed by clinicians or researchers expert in the field of the submitted work. From time to time the journal will also publish printed abstracts from the RANZCOG Annual Scientific Meeting and meetings of relevant special interest groups, where the accepted abstracts have undergone the journals peer review acceptance process.
×
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