Facilitators and barriers in the diagnostic process of vulvovaginal complaints (vulvodynia) in general practice: a qualitative study

Abstract

Background: The gap between the relatively high prevalence of provoked vulvodynia (PVD) in the general population and the low incidence in primary care can partly be explained by physicians’ lack of knowledge about the assessment and management of PVD.

Objectives: To recognize barriers and facilitators of GPs in the diagnostic process of women presenting with recurrent vulvovaginal complaints.

Methods: A qualitative focus group study in 17 Dutch GPs, five men and 12 women. An interview guide, based on the scientific literature and the expertise of the researchers, including a vignette of a patient, was used to direct the discussion between the GPs. The interviews were audiotaped and transcribed verbatim. A systematic text analysis of the transcripts was performed after data saturation was reached.

Results: Analysis of the interviews generated three major themes: Identifying and discussing sexual complaints, importance of gender in professional experience, and coping with professional uncertainty. Within these themes, the reluctance regarding sexual complaints, male gender, negative emotional responses when faced with professional uncertainty, as well as lack of education were barriers to the diagnostic process and management of PVD. Female gender and understanding that patients can profit from enquiring about sexual health issues were found to be facilitating factors.

Conclusions: To improve the care for women with PVD, attitude and skills of GPs regarding taking a sexual history and performing a vulvovaginal examination should be addressed, as well as GPs’ coping strategies regarding their professional uncertainty.

Keywords:

• (MeSH)
• general practice
• vulvodynia
• clinical decision-making
• differential diagnosis
• uncertainty

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the GPs who attended the focus group discussions, as well as M. Vergeer, sexologist, G. Donker, (moderators) and E. Kalicharan who contributed to the research project.

Disclosure statement

The authors report no conflicts of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of the paper.

Additional information

Funding

Expert Group on Sexual Health of the Dutch College of General Practitioners Dutch Scientific Society of Sexology.