Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • LATEST ARTICLES
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • RESOURCES
    • About BJGP Open
    • BJGP Open Accessibility Statement
    • Editorial Board
    • Editorial Fellowships
    • Audio Abstracts
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • BJGP Life
    • Research into Publication Science
    • Advertising
    • Contact
  • SPECIAL ISSUES
    • Social Care Integration with Primary Care: call for articles
    • Special issue: Telehealth
    • Special issue: Race and Racism in Primary Care
    • Special issue: COVID-19 and Primary Care
    • Past research calls
    • Top 10 Research Articles of the Year
  • BJGP CONFERENCE →
  • RCGP
    • British Journal of General Practice
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers

User menu

  • Alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
BJGP Open
  • RCGP
    • British Journal of General Practice
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in
  • Follow BJGP Open on Instagram
  • Visit bjgp open on Bluesky
  • Blog
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
BJGP Open

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • LATEST ARTICLES
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • RESOURCES
    • About BJGP Open
    • BJGP Open Accessibility Statement
    • Editorial Board
    • Editorial Fellowships
    • Audio Abstracts
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • BJGP Life
    • Research into Publication Science
    • Advertising
    • Contact
  • SPECIAL ISSUES
    • Social Care Integration with Primary Care: call for articles
    • Special issue: Telehealth
    • Special issue: Race and Racism in Primary Care
    • Special issue: COVID-19 and Primary Care
    • Past research calls
    • Top 10 Research Articles of the Year
  • BJGP CONFERENCE →
Research

Primary care clinicians’ perspectives on interacting with patients with gynaecological conditions: a systematic review

Simon Briscoe, Jo Thompson Coon, G J Melendez-Torres, Rebecca Abbott, Liz Shaw, Michael Nunns and Ruth Garside
BJGP Open 2024; 8 (1): BJGPO.2023.0133. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGPO.2023.0133
Simon Briscoe
1 Exeter PRP Evidence Review Facility, University of Exeter Medical School, St Luke’s Campus, University of Exeter, Exeter, Devon, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: s.briscoe{at}exeter.ac.uk
Jo Thompson Coon
1 Exeter PRP Evidence Review Facility, University of Exeter Medical School, St Luke’s Campus, University of Exeter, Exeter, Devon, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
G J Melendez-Torres
1 Exeter PRP Evidence Review Facility, University of Exeter Medical School, St Luke’s Campus, University of Exeter, Exeter, Devon, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Rebecca Abbott
2 NIHR Applied Research Collaboration South West Peninsula, University of Exeter Medical School, St Luke’s Campus, University of Exeter, Exeter, Devon, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Liz Shaw
1 Exeter PRP Evidence Review Facility, University of Exeter Medical School, St Luke’s Campus, University of Exeter, Exeter, Devon, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Michael Nunns
1 Exeter PRP Evidence Review Facility, University of Exeter Medical School, St Luke’s Campus, University of Exeter, Exeter, Devon, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ruth Garside
1 Exeter PRP Evidence Review Facility, University of Exeter Medical School, St Luke’s Campus, University of Exeter, Exeter, Devon, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • PRISMA flow diagram
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1. PRISMA flow diagram

Tables

  • Figures
    • View popup
    Table 1. Four level thematic framework
    ThemeExplanationa
    1. Individual clinician level factorsHow decisions about patient care are informed by perspectives of PCCs on diagnosing and managing gynaecological conditions and symptoms in one-to-one consultation settings.
    2. Structural and organisational factorsHow the design and management of primary care settings affects the care provided, and how wider issues in secondary care affect primary care.
    3. Community and external factorsHow wider sociocultural issues and beliefs affect interactions between PCCs and patients.
    4. Factors related to gynaecological conditionsHow factors related to gynaecological conditions affect interactions between PCCs and patients, specifically where these factors were identified across multiple gynaecological conditions.
    • aWe have changed language for ‘endometriosis’ as presented in Dixon et al to more generically ‘gynaecological conditions’ for the purpose of the broader scope of the present study.26 PCC = primary care clinician.

    • View popup
    Table 2. Study characteristics
    CharacteristicData (number of studies with data, %)
    Type of primary care clinicianCommunity gynaecologist (1, 4%); GP (20, 80%); internist or family practitioner (2, 8%); nurse (4, 16%); pharmacist (2, 8%)
    ConditionChronic pelvic pain (2, 8%); endometriosis (8, 32%); infertility disease (1, 4%); menopause (6, 24%); menorrhagia (3, 12%); menstrual disorders (1, 4%); PCOS (3, 12%); premenstrual symptoms (1, 4%)
    Country settingAustralia (7, 28%); The Netherlands (2, 8%); Norway (1, 4%); Sweden (2, 8%); UK (9, 36%); US (4, 16%)
    • PCOS = polycystic ovary syndrome.

    • View popup
    Table 3. Themes and sub-themes with most supporting studies per theme (see Table S5 for full list of sub-themes)
    ThemesSub-themes(supporting studies, n)Descriptions and supporting quotations
    Individual clinician level factors1.13a Treating women with empathy and respect (n = 10)14,16,26,28,34,38–41,44 PCCs recognised the importance of empathising with how women feel. Respecting patients meant discussing symptoms and conditions in an open manner that was not dismissive of women’s ability to understand potential diagnoses and management.
    1.14Understanding psychosocial impacts of gynaecological conditions (n = 13)14,16,18,26,28,31,34,35,37–41,44 PCCs recognised a need for an holistic approach to patient care, and showing an understanding of the psychological and social effects of a condition as well as the physiological effects.
    1.15Using women’s subjective awareness of what is normal and abnormal to inform decision making (n = 10)16,28,29,31,32,38,40,41,43,45 PCCs described how they take into account women’s perceptions of what is normal or abnormal pain or bleeding. Abnormal pain was characterised as enough difference to interfere with patients’ daily living.38
    Structural and organisational factors2.2Limited education for primary care clinical team (n = 6)14,16,17,26,38,41 PCCs reported that they did not receive much training on women’s health issues during their professional education or ongoing training. Limited education was raised as an issue for menopause, chronic pelvic pain and endometriosis, as well as generally for women’s health issues.
    2.5Recognition of the importance of a multidisciplinary approach (n = 5)16,17,28,34,38 PCCs considered that a collaborative approach to working with other clinical specialists could improve the level of care that a patient receives.
    2.7Unmanageable primary care doctor workload (n = 7)14,15,18,26,27,32,36,44 PCCs perceived that high levels of GP workload sometimes prevented them from doing more than the minimum required for their patients.
    Community and external factors3.3Normalisation of symptoms in wider society and among clinicians (n = 6)15,16,26,31,35,36,38,45 PCCs perceived that symptoms of gynaecological conditions, including pain and heavy menstrual bleeding, are not always recognised by patients as outside of the normal range.
    3.4Stigma or embarrassment of menstrual conditions and symptoms among patients (n = 8)14,16,17,26,29,31,32,37 PCCs perceived that there is stigma and embarrassment about menstrual conditions and symptoms. This can include cultural stigma surrounding menstruation and embarrassment about visible signs of bleeding.
    3.5Web-based sources of accurate information are needed to correct misinformation (n = 6)15,16,18,26,28,33,34 PCCs noted that there was a preponderance of online misinformation about gynaecological conditions.18,34 PCCs would find it helpful to be able to signpost patients to reliable sources of online information.16,26
    Factors related to gynaecological conditions4.1Gynaecological conditions can be difficult to definitively diagnose (n = 9)17,18,26,28,29,34,37,41,43 PCCs reported that some gynaecological conditions require multiple visits to see a clinician to assess the patients’ symptoms over time.
    4.3Medicalisation of social phenomena or not believing there to be a physical issue (n = 7)16,18,34,39,41,44,45 PCCs considered that symptoms associated with gynaecological conditions could arise owing to psychological issues rather than physical issues, in particular, symptoms of endometriosis and chronic pelvic pain.18,41,45
    4.4Need to follow a diagnostic hierarchy (n = 8)16,17,26,34,36,38,41,44 PCCs seek to exclude the most serious conditions before considering less serious or time-sensitive conditions. Once more serious conditions had been excluded, clinicians’ sense of urgency for a diagnosis was reduced if the symptoms were not severe.
    • aSubtheme numbers are the same as in Supplementary Table S5. PCC = primary care clinician.

Supplementary Data

  • SB_10.3399BJGPO.2023.0133_supp.pdf -

    Supplementary material is not copyedited or typeset, and is published as supplied by the author(s). The author(s) retain(s) responsibility for its accuracy.

Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

In this issue

BJGP Open
Vol. 8, Issue 1
April 2024
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Download PDF
Download PowerPoint
Email Article

Thank you for recommending BJGP Open.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person to whom you are recommending the page knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Primary care clinicians’ perspectives on interacting with patients with gynaecological conditions: a systematic review
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from BJGP Open
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from BJGP Open.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Primary care clinicians’ perspectives on interacting with patients with gynaecological conditions: a systematic review
Simon Briscoe, Jo Thompson Coon, G J Melendez-Torres, Rebecca Abbott, Liz Shaw, Michael Nunns, Ruth Garside
BJGP Open 2024; 8 (1): BJGPO.2023.0133. DOI: 10.3399/BJGPO.2023.0133

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Primary care clinicians’ perspectives on interacting with patients with gynaecological conditions: a systematic review
Simon Briscoe, Jo Thompson Coon, G J Melendez-Torres, Rebecca Abbott, Liz Shaw, Michael Nunns, Ruth Garside
BJGP Open 2024; 8 (1): BJGPO.2023.0133. DOI: 10.3399/BJGPO.2023.0133
del.icio.us logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo Bluesky logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • LinkedIn logo LinkedIn
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley
  • Bluesky logo Bluesky

Jump to section

  • Top
  • Article
    • Abstract
    • How this fits in
    • Introduction
    • Method
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Notes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF

Keywords

  • women’s health
  • systematic review
  • qualitative research
  • primary health care
  • gynaecological conditions

More in this TOC Section

  • A systematic review of behavioural interventions for prevention of recurrent urinary tract infections
  • Factors affecting the likelihood of documented medication concerns in patients with multimorbidity: a cross-sectional study in primary care
  • Workplace wellbeing for the general practice workforce across England: mapping current services
Show more Research

Related Articles

Cited By...

Intended for Healthcare Professionals

 
 

British Journal of General Practice

NAVIGATE

  • Home
  • Latest articles
  • Authors & reviewers
  • Accessibility statement

RCGP

  • British Journal of General Practice
  • BJGP for RCGP members
  • RCGP eLearning
  • InnovAiT Journal
  • Jobs and careers

MY ACCOUNT

  • RCGP members' login
  • Terms and conditions

NEWS AND UPDATES

  • About BJGP Open
  • Alerts
  • RSS feeds
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

AUTHORS & REVIEWERS

  • Submit an article
  • Writing for BJGP Open: research
  • Writing for BJGP Open: practice & policy
  • BJGP Open editorial process & policies
  • BJGP Open ethical guidelines
  • Peer review for BJGP Open

CUSTOMER SERVICES

  • Advertising
  • Open access licence

CONTRIBUTE

  • BJGP Life
  • eLetters
  • Feedback

CONTACT US

BJGP Open Journal Office
RCGP
30 Euston Square
London NW1 2FB
Tel: +44 (0)20 3188 7400
Email: bjgpopen@rcgp.org.uk

BJGP Open is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners

© 2026 BJGP Open

Online ISSN: 2398-3795