RESEARCH PAPER
Visit to a gynecologist – psychological diagnostic and therapeutic aspects
More details
Hide details
1
II Wydział Lekarski, Warszawski Uniwersytet Medyczny
2
Zakład Położnictwa i Ginekologii i Pielęgniarstwa Położniczo-Ginekologicznego, Wydział Nauk o Zdrowiu Uniwersytet Jana Kochanowskiego w Kielcach
Corresponding author
Jakub Gruszka
II Wydział Lekarski Warszawski Uniwersytet
Medyczny, ul. Żwirki Wigury 61, 02-091 Warszawa, Polska
Med Og Nauk Zdr. 2014;20(2):126-130
KEYWORDS
ABSTRACT
A visit to a gynecological surgery is not an easy for a woman. It is associated with concerns which, with time, turn into fear
and anxiety. Women expect delicacy, discretion and good communication skills from their gynecologist. Most of them use
the opinions of other women who have already had an the experience of such a visit to a gynecologist, when choosing their
doctor. The aim of this study was to reveal the reasons why women visit specific gynaecological surgeries, and show them
from the psychological, diagnostic and medical aspect. The research was conducted in 2011–2012 in a group of 403 students,
aged 17–47, from the Regions of Kielce and Warsaw in order to show women’s reasons to visits to gynecologist and their
expectations from those visits. For this purpose, a survey was conducted. The questions were formulated in different ways,
requiring a yes or no answer, or selection of multiple answers. The questions corresponded to women of all ages living in rural
and urban areas. The condition for being included in the study was that a woman has already made a visit to a gynecologist.
The results showed that a visit to the gynecologist is associated with stress, which is caused by fears, shame and fear of
pain or detection of a disease. Nowadays, more and more women and more younger women report to a gynecologist for
advice. Most of them, despite their concerns before the first appointment, report for subsequent visits with less fear and
with positive feelings. The women expect from the gynecologist communication skills and a positive attitude towards the
patient. The place of residence has no effect on women›s awareness of the risk of sexually transmitted diseases.
REFERENCES (21)
1.
Pietras J, Stodolak A, Gabryś M. Preferencje i oczekiwania kobiet w zakresie opieki ginekologiczno−położniczej. Pol. Med. Rodz., 2004; 6(1): 353–356.
2.
Wiłznowska-Maczyńska K, Wilczak M, Rzymski P. Wpływ wieku, miejsca zamieszkania i wykształcenia na podejście pacjentek do badania ginekologicznego i na częstość ich wizyt u ginekologa. Przegląd Ginekologiczno-Położniczy. 2004; 4: 185–189.
3.
Ackerson K, Preston S. A decision theory perspective on why women do or do not decide to have cancer screening: systematic review. J Adv Nurs. 2009; 65: 1130–1140.
4.
Pendleton D, Hasler J. Doctor – patient communication, Academic Press, London 1983; 45–52.
5.
Spence MR. Rozpoznawanie i leczenie grzybicy pochwy. Gin po Dyplomie. Contemporary OB/GYN. Wydanie polskie 2001; 6(16): 41–46.
6.
Quint EH. Gynecological care for teenagers with disabilities. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol 2003; 16: 115.
7.
Derczyński W. Opinie o opiece zdrowotnej, Komunikat z badań CBOS: BS/19/2000, Warszawa 2000; 9.
8.
Klasa-Mazurkiewicz D, Emerich J, Milczek T. Próba wyjaśnienia związku zaawansowania klinicznego raka szyjki macicy z długoletnim niezgłaszaniem się na kontrolne badanie ginekologiczne. Ginekologia Polska 2002; 73: 823–828.
9.
Waszyński E. Zachowanie intymności pacjentki w gabinecie ginekologicznym. Wyd. Astrum, Wrocław 2000; 100.
10.
Gordon T. Pacjent jako partner. Instytut Wydawniczy PAX, Warszawa 1999.
11.
Sokołowska M. Socjologia Medycyny. PZWL, Warszawa 1986; 140–146.
12.
Mayerscough PR, Ford M. Jak rozmawiać z pacjentem, Gdańskie Wydawnictwo Psychologiczne, Gdańsk 2001; 68–82.
13.
Chazan B. Badanie ginekologiczne. Wytyczne Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, Medycyna Praktyczna Ginekologia i Położnictwo 2004; 5, 12.
14.
Schmittdiel J, Selby J, Grumbach K, et al. Women s provider preferences for basic gynecology care in a large health maintenance organization. J Womens Health Gend Based Med. 1999; 8: 825–827.
15.
Shah P, Norlin Ch, Logsdon V, Samson-Fang L. Gynecological care for adolescents with disability: physician comfort, perceived barriers, and potential solutions. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol 2005; 18: 101.
16.
Guidelines for the evaluation of sexual abuse of children: subject review. American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Child Abuse and Neglect. Pediatrics 1999; 103: 186.
17.
Kardas P, Ratajczyk-Pakalska E. Przestrzeganie zaleceń lekarskich. W: Barański J, Waszyński E, Steciwko A. Komunikowanie się lekarza z pacjentem. Wyd. Astrum, Wrocław 2000; 105–108.
18.
Soper DE. Rozważania na temat diagnostyki i leczenia zapaleń pochwy. Ginekologia po dyplomie 2005; 7: 2–8.
19.
MacDougall J. The needs of the adolescent patient and her parents in the clinic. In: Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology. A Multidisciplinary Approach. Ed. Balen AH. 1st Edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004; 179.
20.
Piskorz M, Zielińska A, Józefiak A, i wsp. Wiedza na temat profilaktyki raka szyjki macicy kobiet uczestniczących w Ogólnopolskim Programie Profilaktyki Raka Szyjki Macicy. Przegląd Położniczo-Ginekologiczny. 2005; 5: 141–143.
21.
Synowiec-Piłat M. Percepcja umiejętności interpersonalnych (komunikacyjnych) lekarzy ginekologów. Ginekologia Praktyczna. 2003; 11: 19–24.