667
Views
26
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Article

‘You expose yourself in so many ways’: young women's experiences of pelvic examination

, &
Pages 59-64 | Received 06 Dec 2010, Accepted 02 Feb 2011, Published online: 08 Mar 2011

References

  • Association of Swedish Youth Clinics. Policy programme for youth clinics. 2002. Available from http://www.fsum.org/policysv.pdf [accessed 10 January 2010].
  • Haar E, Halitsky V, Stricker G. Patient's attitudes toward gynecologic examination and to gynecologists. Med Care 1997;15:787–795.
  • Areskog-Wijma B. The gynaecological examination – women's experiences and preferences and the role of the gynaecologist. J Psychosom Obstet Gynecol 1987;6:59–69.
  • Larsen M, Oldeide CC, Malterud K. Not so bad after all … Women's experiences of PEs. Fam Pract 1997;14:148–152.
  • Galasinski D, Ziolkowska J. Gender and the gynecological examination: women's identities in doctors' narratives. Qual Health Res 2007;17:477–488.
  • Oscarsson MG, Benzein EG, Wijma BE. The first pelvic examination. J Psychosom Obstet Gynecol 2007;28:7–12.
  • Huber JD, Pukall CF, Boyer SC, Reissing ED, Chamberlain SM. ‘Just relax’: physicians' experiences with women who are difficult or impossible to examine gynecologically. J Sex Med 2009;6:791–799.
  • Oscarsson MG, Benzein E. Women's experiences of pelvic examination: an interview study. J Psychosom Obstet Gynecol 2002;23:17–25.
  • Phillips D, Brooks F. Women patients' preferences for female or male GPs. Fam Pract 1998;15:543–547.
  • Moettus A, Sklar D, Tanberg D. The effect of physician gender on women's perceived pain and embarrassment during pelvic examination. Am J Emerg Med 1999;17:635–637.
  • Rifkin JI, Shapiro H, Regensteiner JG, Stotler JK, Schmidt B. Why do some women refuse to allow male residents to perform pelvic exams? Acad Med 2002;77:1034–1038.
  • Yanikkerem E, Özdemir M, Bingol H, Tatar A, Karadeniz G. Women's attitudes and expectations regarding gynaecological examination. Midwifery 2009;25:500–508.
  • Wendt E, Fridlund B, Lidell E. Trust and confirmation in a gynaecologic examination situation: a critical incident technique analysis. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2004;83:1208–1215.
  • Gupta S, Hogan R, Kirkman RJE. Experience of the first pelvic examination. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care 2001;6:34–38.
  • Fiddes P, Scott A, Flertcher J, Glaiser A. Attitudes towards pelvic examination and chaperones: a questionnaire survey of patients and providers. Contraception 2003;67:313–317.
  • Hilden M, Sidenius K, Langhoff-Roos J, Wijma B, Schei B. Women's experiences of the gynaecologic examination: factors associated with discomfort. Acta Obst Gynecol Scand 2003;82:1030–1036.
  • Reddy DM, Wasserman SA. Patient anxiety during gynecologic examinations. J Reprod Med 1997;42:631–636.
  • Wijma B, Gullberg M, Kjessler B. Attitudes towards pelvic examination in a random sample of Swedish women. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1998;77:422–428.
  • Larsen SB, Kragstrup J. Experiences of the first pelvic examination in a random sample of Danish teenagers. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1995;74:137–141.
  • Swedish code of Statutes. The act concerning the ethical review of research involving humans (SFS 2003:460). 2003. Available from http://www.epn.se/start/startpage.aspx [accessed 7 September 2009].
  • World Medical Association. Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki – ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. 2008. Available from http://www.wma.net/en/30publications/10policies/b3/index.html [accessed 10 January 2010].
  • Kvale S, Brinkmann S. Interviews: learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing. London: Sage; 2009. pp 143–140.
  • Cohen MZ, Kahn DL, Steeves RH. Hermeneutic phenomenological research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2000. pp 59–64.
  • Moustakas C. Phenomenological research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 1994. pp 121–122.
  • Lincoln YS, Guba EG. Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage; 1985. pp 289–328.
  • Larsen SB, Kragstrup J. Expectations and knowledge of pelvic examinations in a random sample of Danish teenagers. J Psychosom Obstet Gynecol 1995;16:93–99.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.