Urinary incontinence in women: treatment barriers and significance for Danish and German GPs

Author:

Elsner Susanne1,Juergensen Martina2,Faust Elke3,Niesel Achim4,Pedersen Louise Schreiber5,Rudnicki Peter Martin6,Waldmann Annika17

Affiliation:

1. Institute for Social Medicine and Epidemiology, Lübeck, Germany

2. Institute for the History of Medicine and Science Studies, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany

3. Gynäkologische Praxisklinik, Hamburg, Germany

4. Klinik Preetz, Preetz, Germany

5. Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Herlev Gentofte, University Hospital, Herlev

6. Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Odense University, Odense, Denmark

7. Hamburg Cancer Registry, Hamburg, Germany

Abstract

Abstract Background Female urinary incontinence (UI) is common. Only scant information exists on the significance of UI for GPs’ consultations. Objectives (i) To assess the significance of female UI for GPs and to look at barriers that could be detrimental to treatment by comparing GPs from Denmark and Germany, with different health systems and access to UI guidelines. (ii) To assess whether GPs’ gender and age were relevant to the discussion of UI. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional survey. In the Fehmarn belt-region, a Danish–German border region, a self-developed questionnaire was sent to all the GPs (n = 930). Results In total, 407 GPs returned the questionnaire (43%); 403 questionnaires were analysed. Using a scale from 0 (never) to 10 (always), addressing UI was reported with an average score of 3.8 (SD: 2.1) among Danish and 3.5 (SD: 2.1) among German GPs. The topic was discussed more frequently with female (4.2; SD 2.2) than with male GPs (3.2; SD 2.0). Danish GPs estimated the prevalence among their female patients at 10% (SD: 8.0) and German GPs at 14% (SD: 11.2). 61% of the Danish and 19% of the German GPs used UI guidelines. German GPs significantly more often reported the barrier ‘uncertainty of how to treat UI’ [OR = 5.39 (95% CI: 2.8; 10.4)]. Conclusions In consultations with female GPs, UI was discussed significantly more frequently than with male GPs. Compared with the Danish GPs, German GPs stated significantly more uncertainties regarding UI treatment measures, and tended not to use UI guidelines.

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Family Practice

Cited by 3 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3