98
Views
0
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Effect of Consultation Number on the Assessment and Treatment of Polycystic Ovary Syndrome

ORCID Icon, , , , , , , , , , , , , & show all
Pages 527-541 | Received 19 Oct 2023, Accepted 12 Mar 2024, Published online: 25 Mar 2024
 

Abstract

Background

The basic medical education stage is not enough to support physicians to fully diagnose and evaluate polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). The study aims to discover the difference in treatment choice between participants with different annual consultation number of PCOS, to promote lifelong learning, and drive balanced development within healthcare.

Methods

This is a multicenter cross-sectional survey. Participants’ basic information, knowledge of PCOS and treatment options were collected online. According to the annual consultation number of patients with PCOS, physicians were divided into three groups: 0–50 people/yr, 50–200 people/yr, and >200 people/yr, and the results were derived from χ2 test, Fisher exact test, and multivariate logistic regression analysis.

Results

The study analyzed 1689 questionnaires, and 1206 physicians (71.4%) received less than 50 women per year, 388 physicians (30.0%) with an annual number of 50–200 women, and 95 physicians (5.6%) with patient turnover for more than 200 people. Reproductive endocrinologists generally have higher access to the clinic. As the number of visits increases, more and more physicians would perceive patients as more likely to have abnormal blood glucose and heavy weight. Physicians with large numbers of consultations are more likely to use Asian or Chinese standards to assess obesity. The multivariate analysis involved variables such as age, hospital level, specialty, and patient turnover annually, and more young doctors actively assessed lipid profile (odds ratio (OR) 1.56, 95% confidence interval (CI) (1.16, 2.16)), and primary hospitals (OR 0.65 CI (0.44, 0.89)) chose OGTT for blood glucose assessment less than tertiary hospitals. Physicians in secondary hospitals are more aggressive in evaluating androgens.

Conclusion

Our survey found differences in endocrine assessment, metabolic screening, and treatment in PCOS women in terms of the number of obstetrician-gynecologists who received different patient consultation numbers. The importance of continuing education for physicians is emphasized, to promote lifelong learning.

Abbreviations

PCOS, Polycystic ovary syndrome; IR, Insulin resistance; OGTT, Oral glucose tolerance test; HOMA-IR, Homeostasis model assessment-Insulin resistant; IR, Insulin resistance; Repro-Endo, Reproductive endocrinologists; OB-Gyn, Obstetrician-gynecologists; BMI, body mass index; WHO, World Health OrganizationI.

Data Sharing Statement

The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Ethics Approval and Consent to Participate

The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences (No. S-K1373). Written informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to the online survey.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank all Chinese obstetricians and gynecologists who participated in the survey for sharing their valuable views. We also thank China Maternal and Child Health Association for supporting our survey.

Author Contributions

All authors read and approved the final manuscript. All authors made a significant contribution to the work reported, whether that is in the conception, study design, execution, acquisition of data, analysis and interpretation, or in all these areas; took part in drafting, revising or critically reviewing the article; gave final approval of the version to be published; have agreed on the journal to which the article has been submitted; and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

Disclosure

The authors declare that they have no competing interests in this work.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the Capital’s Funds for Health Improvement and Research (CFH:2020-2-40113) and Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos, 82074143).