What influences GPs' use of pelvic examination? A qualitative investigation in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Omission of pelvic examination (PE) has been associated with diagnostic delay in women diagnosed with gynaecological cancer. However, PEs are often not carried out by GPs. AIM: To determine the perceptions of GPs about the role of PEs, the barriers to and facilitators of PEs, and GPs' experience of PEs in practice. DESIGN AND SETTING: Qualitative semi-structured interview study conducted in one health board in Scotland (mixed urban and rural) with an approximate population of 500 000. METHOD: Interviews were conducted face-to-face or by telephone between March and June 2019. Framework analysis used the COM-B behaviour change model concepts of capability, opportunity, and motivation. RESULTS: Data was compatible with all three domains of the COM-B framework. Capability related to training in and maintenance of skills. These went beyond carrying out the examination to interpreting it reliably. Opportunity related to the clinical environment and the provision of chaperones for intimate examination. Interviewees described a range of motivations towards or against PEs that were unrelated to either capability or opportunity. These all related to providing high-quality care, but this was defined in different ways: 'doing what is best for the individual', 'doctors examine', and 'GPs as pragmatists'. CONCLUSION: GPs' reasons for carrying out, or not carrying out, PEs in women with symptoms potentially indicating cancer are complex. The COM-B framework provides a way of understanding this complexity. Interventions to increase the use of PEs, and critics of its non-use, need to consider these multiple factors.

National guidelines for management of cervical squamous intraepithelial lesion: A survey of European Federation for colposcopy members.

OBJECTIVES: The management of women with cervical squamous intraepithelial lesions (SIL) is fundamental to prevention of cervical cancer in an organized cervical screening programme. Clinical guidance should improve quality of care and clinical effectiveness if developed and implemented appropriately. This survey provides an update on the current situation of national guidelines for management of cervical SIL amongst member countries of European Federation for Colposcopy (EFC). STUDY DESIGN: A questionnaire was sent to representatives of each member country of EFC. The questionnaire contained questions on: guidelines for management of cervical SIL of the National Societies/Associations of Colposcopy or others national societies/associations including the development and the consultation processes, guidelines for management of lower genital tract diseases and the regulations in each country for colposcopy practice. RESULTS: We received responses from all 34 member countries. Thirty countries reported a national guideline for management of cervical SIL that were developed by, or in conjunction with, their national societies or associations of colposcopy. In most cases there was adherence to the recommended steps for guideline development: they were developed by a multi-disciplinary group of specialists (29 countries) and society members were consulted before publication (21 countries). A small number of countries (8) reported to have guidelines for the management of lower genital tract dysplasia (e.g. vulval disease) developed by other national societies. In most countries (26) the colposcopists are obliged to follow the guidelines but this is regulated in only 6 and in 12 countries the colposcopists need to be certified by the national society of colposcopy in order to practice. CONCLUSION: There are advances in the development and provision of country specific guidance on the management of cervical SIL. Most EFC member countries have appropriate national guidelines that were developed using a clear methodology, are updated according to progresses in the field and are accessible online to current practitioners. These guidelines support colposcopists to follow evidence-based practice and provides understanding of best practice in guideline development and access.

The use, quality and effectiveness of pelvic examination in primary care for the detection of gynaecological cancer: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Urgent suspected cancer referral guidelines recommend that women with gynaecological cancer symptoms should have a pelvic examination (PE) prior to referral. We do not know to what extent GPs comply, their competency at PE, or if PE shortens the diagnostic interval. OBJECTIVES: We conducted a systematic review of the use, quality and effectiveness of PE in primary care for women with suspected gynaecological cancer. METHOD: PRISMA guidelines were followed. Three databases were searched using four terms: PE, primary care, competency and gynaecological cancer. Citation lists of all identified papers were screened independently for eligibility by two reviewers. Data extraction was performed in duplicate and independently. Paper quality was assessed using the relevant Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist. Emergent themes and contrasting issues were explored in a narrative ecological synthesis. MAIN FINDINGS: Twenty papers met the inclusion criteria. 52% or less of women with suspicious symptoms had a PE. No papers directly explored GPs' competence at performing PE. Pre-referral PE was associated with reduced diagnostic delay and earlier stage diagnosis. Ecological synthesis demonstrated a complex interplay between patient and practitioner factors and the environment in which examination is performed. Presenting symptoms are commonly misattributed by patients and practitioners resulting in misdiagnosis and lack of PE. CONCLUSION: We do not know if pre-referral PE leads to better outcomes for patients. PE is often not performed for women with gynaecological cancer symptoms, and evidence that it may result in earlier stage of diagnosis is weak. More research is needed.