医生对非侵入性非激素避孕的态度。

Kansas Journal of Medicine Pub Date : 2023-04-24 eCollection Date: 2023-01-01 DOI:10.17161/kjm.vol16.18958
Alexandra V Davidson, Faith M Butler
{"title":"医生对非侵入性非激素避孕的态度。","authors":"Alexandra V Davidson, Faith M Butler","doi":"10.17161/kjm.vol16.18958","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Evidence-based, nonbiased, counseling on contraceptive options, followed by shared decision-making, is key in facilitating reproductive justice in a diverse population. An estimated 3% of contraceptive users in the United States use fertility awareness-based methods (FABMs) for contraception, and demand for these methods is increasing. FABMs can be a highly effective form of family planning when used in accordance with evidence-based protocols. They are preferred by some patients due to medical contraindications to hormonal contraceptives, lack of side effects, religious convictions, preference to avoid hormones or contraceptive devices, improved body literacy, or a combination of the above. FABMs are infrequently covered in medical school curricula and are often perceived by physicians to be of low efficacy. There is an opportunity for improvement of physicians' evidence-based knowledge of FABMs, which has the potential to improve patient understanding of and access to the full menu of family planning options.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A self-administered, cross-sectional survey was distributed to assess physician knowledge and opinions of FABMs by key university contacts. Univariate and bivariate statistics were calculated for close-ended questions and responses to open-ended questions were analyzed for common themes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 79 participants completed the entire survey. Another 11 submitted partially completed surveys. For completed surveys, questions assessing knowledge of key concepts underlying FABMs, performance by specialty was 55% correct for OB/GYN (n = 16), 55% (n = 47) correct for family medicine, 36% (n = 10) correct for internal medicine, and 35% (n = 6) correct for pediatrics. Negative, neutral, mixed, and positive opinions related to FABMs were represented.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There are opportunities to improve physicians' evidence-based knowledge of FABMs; this may improve patient-centered contraceptive care.</p>","PeriodicalId":17991,"journal":{"name":"Kansas Journal of Medicine","volume":"16 ","pages":"94-104"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/cb/44/16-94.PMC10136678.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Physician Dispositions Toward Noninvasive Non-Hormonal Contraception.\",\"authors\":\"Alexandra V Davidson, Faith M Butler\",\"doi\":\"10.17161/kjm.vol16.18958\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Evidence-based, nonbiased, counseling on contraceptive options, followed by shared decision-making, is key in facilitating reproductive justice in a diverse population. An estimated 3% of contraceptive users in the United States use fertility awareness-based methods (FABMs) for contraception, and demand for these methods is increasing. FABMs can be a highly effective form of family planning when used in accordance with evidence-based protocols. They are preferred by some patients due to medical contraindications to hormonal contraceptives, lack of side effects, religious convictions, preference to avoid hormones or contraceptive devices, improved body literacy, or a combination of the above. FABMs are infrequently covered in medical school curricula and are often perceived by physicians to be of low efficacy. There is an opportunity for improvement of physicians' evidence-based knowledge of FABMs, which has the potential to improve patient understanding of and access to the full menu of family planning options.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A self-administered, cross-sectional survey was distributed to assess physician knowledge and opinions of FABMs by key university contacts. Univariate and bivariate statistics were calculated for close-ended questions and responses to open-ended questions were analyzed for common themes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 79 participants completed the entire survey. Another 11 submitted partially completed surveys. For completed surveys, questions assessing knowledge of key concepts underlying FABMs, performance by specialty was 55% correct for OB/GYN (n = 16), 55% (n = 47) correct for family medicine, 36% (n = 10) correct for internal medicine, and 35% (n = 6) correct for pediatrics. Negative, neutral, mixed, and positive opinions related to FABMs were represented.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There are opportunities to improve physicians' evidence-based knowledge of FABMs; this may improve patient-centered contraceptive care.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17991,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Kansas Journal of Medicine\",\"volume\":\"16 \",\"pages\":\"94-104\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/cb/44/16-94.PMC10136678.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Kansas Journal of Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17161/kjm.vol16.18958\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kansas Journal of Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17161/kjm.vol16.18958","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导言:以证据为基础、无偏见的避孕选择咨询以及共同决策是促进不同人群生殖公正的关键。在美国,估计有 3% 的避孕药具使用者使用基于生育意识的避孕方法(FABMs)进行避孕,而且对这些方法的需求正在不断增加。如果按照循证方案使用,生育觉醒避孕法是一种非常有效的计划生育方法。一些患者由于对激素避孕药有禁忌症、缺乏副作用、宗教信仰、不想使用激素或避孕药具、身体知识的提高或上述因素的综合作用而选择使用这些方法。医学院的课程中很少涉及 FABMs,而且医生往往认为其疗效不佳。医生有机会提高对 FABMs 的循证知识,这有可能改善患者对计划生育全套方案的理解和使用:方法:通过主要的大学联系人分发了一份自填式横截面调查表,以评估医生对 FABMs 的了解和看法。对封闭式问题进行了单变量和双变量统计,并对开放式问题的回答进行了共同主题分析:共有 79 位参与者完成了整个调查。另有 11 人提交了部分完成的调查问卷。在已完成的调查问卷中,对于评估 FABMs 基础关键概念知识的问题,各专科的正确率分别为:妇产科 55%(n = 16),全科 55%(n = 47),内科 36%(n = 10),儿科 35%(n = 6)。与 FABM 相关的意见有消极、中立、混合和积极四种:结论:有机会提高医生对 FABM 的循证知识;这可能会改善以患者为中心的避孕护理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Physician Dispositions Toward Noninvasive Non-Hormonal Contraception.

Physician Dispositions Toward Noninvasive Non-Hormonal Contraception.

Physician Dispositions Toward Noninvasive Non-Hormonal Contraception.

Physician Dispositions Toward Noninvasive Non-Hormonal Contraception.

Introduction: Evidence-based, nonbiased, counseling on contraceptive options, followed by shared decision-making, is key in facilitating reproductive justice in a diverse population. An estimated 3% of contraceptive users in the United States use fertility awareness-based methods (FABMs) for contraception, and demand for these methods is increasing. FABMs can be a highly effective form of family planning when used in accordance with evidence-based protocols. They are preferred by some patients due to medical contraindications to hormonal contraceptives, lack of side effects, religious convictions, preference to avoid hormones or contraceptive devices, improved body literacy, or a combination of the above. FABMs are infrequently covered in medical school curricula and are often perceived by physicians to be of low efficacy. There is an opportunity for improvement of physicians' evidence-based knowledge of FABMs, which has the potential to improve patient understanding of and access to the full menu of family planning options.

Methods: A self-administered, cross-sectional survey was distributed to assess physician knowledge and opinions of FABMs by key university contacts. Univariate and bivariate statistics were calculated for close-ended questions and responses to open-ended questions were analyzed for common themes.

Results: A total of 79 participants completed the entire survey. Another 11 submitted partially completed surveys. For completed surveys, questions assessing knowledge of key concepts underlying FABMs, performance by specialty was 55% correct for OB/GYN (n = 16), 55% (n = 47) correct for family medicine, 36% (n = 10) correct for internal medicine, and 35% (n = 6) correct for pediatrics. Negative, neutral, mixed, and positive opinions related to FABMs were represented.

Conclusions: There are opportunities to improve physicians' evidence-based knowledge of FABMs; this may improve patient-centered contraceptive care.

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
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