{"title":"结直肠专家对女性参与肛交有什么看法?英国口腔医生的在线调查。","authors":"Tabitha Gana, Lesley Hunt","doi":"10.1007/s10151-025-03202-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Increasing participation in anal intercourse (AI) raises questions about its effects on the female anus. Societal change has moved faster than published literature.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Online survey of Association of Coloproctology of Great Britian & Ireland (ACPGBI) and Association of Surgeons of Great Britain & Ireland (ASGBI) members to document clinical practice regarding female AI; opinion on female AI in causation of anal pathology; barriers to discussing AI; possible harms and harm reduction and public information.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>91% of consultant colorectal surgeons (CCS) agree female AI causes anal fissures. Only 25% usually or always ask young women with fissures about AI and 31% never ask. Enquiry increases with refractory fissures (34%) and vulnerable patients (57%); 48% of CCS cite fear of patient discomfort, and 40% fear what the patient thinks of them as barriers to enquiry. Eighty per cent of CCS and 85% of pelvic floor specialists (PFS) agree AI can cause internal anal sphincter (IAS) damage and 72% and 78% faecal incontinence (FI) in women. Eleven per cent of CCS and no PFS agreed relaxation techniques, and 17% and 14% lubrication, protect the IAS; 97% of CCS think there should be increased public health awareness about female AI.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Experts think participation in AI can cause fissures, IAS damage and FI in women. They are sceptical about the protective value of lubrication and relaxation. Clinical conversations lag behind experts' opinions on the importance and possible consequences of female AI. Concern over patients' feelings are barriers to enquiry. Colorectal specialists think there should be more public health information about female AI.</p>","PeriodicalId":51192,"journal":{"name":"Techniques in Coloproctology","volume":"29 1","pages":"162"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12357803/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What do colorectal specialists think about female participation in anal intercourse? An online survey of UK coloproctologists.\",\"authors\":\"Tabitha Gana, Lesley Hunt\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10151-025-03202-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Increasing participation in anal intercourse (AI) raises questions about its effects on the female anus. Societal change has moved faster than published literature.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Online survey of Association of Coloproctology of Great Britian & Ireland (ACPGBI) and Association of Surgeons of Great Britain & Ireland (ASGBI) members to document clinical practice regarding female AI; opinion on female AI in causation of anal pathology; barriers to discussing AI; possible harms and harm reduction and public information.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>91% of consultant colorectal surgeons (CCS) agree female AI causes anal fissures. Only 25% usually or always ask young women with fissures about AI and 31% never ask. Enquiry increases with refractory fissures (34%) and vulnerable patients (57%); 48% of CCS cite fear of patient discomfort, and 40% fear what the patient thinks of them as barriers to enquiry. Eighty per cent of CCS and 85% of pelvic floor specialists (PFS) agree AI can cause internal anal sphincter (IAS) damage and 72% and 78% faecal incontinence (FI) in women. Eleven per cent of CCS and no PFS agreed relaxation techniques, and 17% and 14% lubrication, protect the IAS; 97% of CCS think there should be increased public health awareness about female AI.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Experts think participation in AI can cause fissures, IAS damage and FI in women. They are sceptical about the protective value of lubrication and relaxation. Clinical conversations lag behind experts' opinions on the importance and possible consequences of female AI. Concern over patients' feelings are barriers to enquiry. Colorectal specialists think there should be more public health information about female AI.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51192,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Techniques in Coloproctology\",\"volume\":\"29 1\",\"pages\":\"162\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12357803/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Techniques in Coloproctology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-025-03202-7\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Techniques in Coloproctology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-025-03202-7","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
What do colorectal specialists think about female participation in anal intercourse? An online survey of UK coloproctologists.
Background: Increasing participation in anal intercourse (AI) raises questions about its effects on the female anus. Societal change has moved faster than published literature.
Method: Online survey of Association of Coloproctology of Great Britian & Ireland (ACPGBI) and Association of Surgeons of Great Britain & Ireland (ASGBI) members to document clinical practice regarding female AI; opinion on female AI in causation of anal pathology; barriers to discussing AI; possible harms and harm reduction and public information.
Results: 91% of consultant colorectal surgeons (CCS) agree female AI causes anal fissures. Only 25% usually or always ask young women with fissures about AI and 31% never ask. Enquiry increases with refractory fissures (34%) and vulnerable patients (57%); 48% of CCS cite fear of patient discomfort, and 40% fear what the patient thinks of them as barriers to enquiry. Eighty per cent of CCS and 85% of pelvic floor specialists (PFS) agree AI can cause internal anal sphincter (IAS) damage and 72% and 78% faecal incontinence (FI) in women. Eleven per cent of CCS and no PFS agreed relaxation techniques, and 17% and 14% lubrication, protect the IAS; 97% of CCS think there should be increased public health awareness about female AI.
Conclusions: Experts think participation in AI can cause fissures, IAS damage and FI in women. They are sceptical about the protective value of lubrication and relaxation. Clinical conversations lag behind experts' opinions on the importance and possible consequences of female AI. Concern over patients' feelings are barriers to enquiry. Colorectal specialists think there should be more public health information about female AI.
期刊介绍:
Techniques in Coloproctology is an international journal fully devoted to diagnostic and operative procedures carried out in the management of colorectal diseases. Imaging, clinical physiology, laparoscopy, open abdominal surgery and proctoperineology are the main topics covered by the journal. Reviews, original articles, technical notes and short communications with many detailed illustrations render this publication indispensable for coloproctologists and related specialists. Both surgeons and gastroenterologists are represented on the distinguished Editorial Board, together with pathologists, radiologists and basic scientists from all over the world. The journal is strongly recommended to those who wish to be updated on recent developments in the field, and improve the standards of their work.
Manuscripts submitted for publication must contain a statement to the effect that all human studies have been reviewed by the appropriate ethics committee and have therefore been performed in accordance with the ethical standards laid down in an appropriate version of the 1965 Declaration of Helsinki. It should also be stated clearly in the text that all persons gave their informed consent prior to their inclusion in the study. Details that might disclose the identity of the subjects under study should be omitted. Reports of animal experiments must state that the Principles of Laboratory Animal Care (NIH publication no. 86-23 revised 1985) were followed as were applicable national laws (e.g. the current version of the German Law on the Protection of Animals). The Editor-in-Chief reserves the right to reject manuscripts that do not comply with the above-mentioned requirements. Authors will be held responsible for false statements or for failure to fulfill such requirements.