BibTex RIS Cite

Aile Hekimliği Asistanlarının Rahim İçi Araçlar Hakkındaki Bilgi Düzeyleri ve Kadın Hastalıkları ve Doğum Rotasyonunun Bilgi Düzeyine Etkisi

Year 2016, Volume: 16 Issue: 2, 0 - 0, 20.05.2016
https://doi.org/10.17098/amj.19472

Abstract

Amaç: Bu çalışmada Türkiye’nin İzmir ilindeki eğitim araştırma hastanelerinde aile hekimliği uzmanlık eğitimi alan asistanların rahim içi araç (RİA) hakkındaki bilgi, tutum ve görüşlerini tespit etmek amaçlanmıştır. Ayrıca yapılan kadın doğum rotasyonunun bilgi düzeyine etkisi de bu kapsamda irdelenmiştir.

Materyal ve Metot: 2013 Haziran ve Temmuz aylarında, Türkiye’nin İzmir ilindeki tüm eğitim ve araştırma hastanelerinde eğitim alan 61 aile hekimliği asistanı ile yüzyüze görüşülerek anket uygulandı.  Anket soruları, bakırlı ve hormonlu (levonergestrel) RİAlar hakkında bilgi düzeyini ölçmek üzere, Dünya Sağlık Örgütü (DSÖ) kontraseptif kullanımı için tıbbi uygunluk kriterleri (4. baskı) baz alınarak hazırlandı. Bakırlı ve hormonlu RIAların nulliparite, adolesan dönem, HIV pozitifliği, sigara içilmesi, diyabet varlığı, ektopik gebelik, pelvik inflamatuvar hastalık öyküsü varlığı, obezite, hipertansiyon, menoraji, myom varlığı, uterin kavite distorsiyonu, demir eksikliği anemisi, derin ven trombozu, meme kanseri öyküsü varlığı, üriner sistem hastalığı ve epilepsi durumlarındaki kullanılabilirliğini sorgulayacak 16 soru hazırlandı. Kullanılabilirlik durumunun cevapları da 4 seçenekli DSÖ kontraseptif kullanımı için tıbbi uygunluk kriterleri (4.baskı) esas alınarak değerlendirildi. Araştırmaya katılımda gönüllülük kriteri esas alındı.

Bulgular: Araştırmaya 61 aile hekimliği asistanı katıldı. Asistanlardan kadın hastalıkları ve doğum rotasyonu yapanların oranı %63,9, RIA uygulaması yapmış olanların oranı ise %45,9 olarak saptandı. Asistanlardan daha önce RİA uygulaması yapma, kadın hastalıkları ve doğum rotasyonunu tamamlama ve meslekteki tecrübe süresinin sorulara doğru cevap verme ile ilişkisi incelendi. Kadın doğum rotasyonu yapanların bakırlı RİA sorularına doğru cevap verme oranı istatiksel olarak anlamlı şekilde yüksek idi (p<0,05). Aile hekimliği asistanlarının çoğu bakırlı rahim içi araçların nullipar kadınlarda, demir eksikliği olan kadınlarda ve obez kadınlarda doğru kullanım endikasyonlarını bilmişlerdi. Aile hekimliği asistanlarının çoğu hormonlu rahim içi araçların meme kanseri olanlarda, diyabetik kadınlarda ve nullipar kadınlarda doğru kullanım endikasyonlarını bilmişlerdi.

Sonuç: Aile hekimliği ihtisasında kadın hastalıkları ve doğum rotasyonunun asistanların rahim içi araçlar ile ilgili bilgi düzeyleri üzerine olumlu etkisi bulunmaktadır.   

References

  • Guttmacher institute. US teenage pregnancies, birth, and abortions: national and state trends and trends by race and ethnicity 2010. www.Guttmacher.org/pubs/USTPtrends.pdf, (Erişim tarihi: 12.11.2015).
  • Finer LB, Henshaw SK. Disparities in rates of unintended pregnancy in the United States, 1994 and 2001. Perspect Sex Reprod Health 2006;38(2):90-6.
  • Brown SS, Eisenberg L. The best intentions: unintended pregnancy and the well being of children and families, Washington DC: National Academy Press; 1995.
  • Scholle SH, Chang JC, Harman J, McNeil M. Trends in women's health services by type of physician seen: data from the 1985 and 1997-98 NAMCS. Womens Health 2002;12(4):165-77.
  • World Health Organization. Comparing typical effectiveness of contraceptive methods. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2006.
  • Trussell J. The essential of contraception: efficacy, safety and personel consideration. In: Hatcher RA, Trussel J, Nelson AL, Cates W, Stewart FH, Kowal D, eds. Contraceptive Technology, 19th edition. Newyork: Ardent Media; 2007:19-47.
  • Türkiye nüfus sağlık araştırması 2013. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Nüfus Etütleri Enstitüsü. http://www.hips.hacettepe.edu.tr/TNSA2013_sonuclar_sunum_2122014.pdf (Erişim tarihi: 23.07.2013).
  • United Nations Department of Economy and Social Affairs Population Division. World Contraceptive Use 2009.
  • http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/contraceptive2009/contracept2009_wallchart_front.pdf, (Erişim tarihi: 23.07.2013).
  • Mosher WD, Jones J. Use of contraception in the United States: 1982-2008. National Center for Health Statistics. Vital Health Stat 2010;(29):1-44.
  • Bello JK, Rao G, Stulberg DB. Trends in contraceptive and preconception care in United States ambulatory practices. Fam Med 2015;47(4):264-71.
  • Nigeria.Konje JC, Oladini F, Otolorin EO, Ladipo OO. Factors determining the choice of contraceptive methods at the Family Planning Clinic, University College Hospital, Ibadan. Br J Fam Plann 1998;24(3):107-10.
  • Rubin SE, Fletcher J, Stein T, Segall-Gutierrez P, Gold M. Determinants of intrauterine contraception provision among US family physicians: a national survey of knowledge, attitudes and practice. Contraception 2011;83(5):472-8.
  • Harper CC, Henderson JT, Raine TR, Goodman S, Darney PD, Thompson KM, et al. Evidence-based IUD practice: family physicians and obstetrician-gynecologists. Fam Med 2012;44(9):637-45.
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention US. Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use, 2010. http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/pdf/rr/rr59e0528.pdf, (Erişim tarihi: 01.10.2014).
  • World Health Organization. Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use fourth edition. http://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/publications/family_planning/9789241563888/en, (Erişim tarihi:23.07.2013).
  • Mıhçıokur S, Akın A. Bazı Aile Hekimlerinin Aile Planlaması Hizmeti Sunma Durumu ve Aile Sağlığı Merkezlerinde Aile Planlaması Hizmet Sunumu İle İlgili Görüşleri. 16. Ulusal Halk Sağlığı Kongresi. http://halksagligiokulu.org/anasayfa/components/com_booklibrary/ebooks/16.UHSK%20Kitap.pdf, (Erişim tarihi: 03.08.2014).
  • Menéndez VC, Fernández DMJ, Doval CXL, Blanco PS, García MA, Gulín GR. Comparison of family physicians' and gynecologists' use of the intrauterine device (IUD). Aten Primaria 1998;22(10):622-6.
  • Weisberg E, Fraser IS, Goss S. The decline in popularity of the intrauterine device. A survey of general practitioner attitudes and practices in New South Wales. Med J Aust 1994;160(1):19-21.
  • Espey E, Ogburn T, Espey D, Etsitty V. IUD-related knowledge, attitudes and practices among Navajo Area Indian Health Service providers. Perspect Sex Reprod Health 2003;35(4):169-73.
  • Rubin SE, Campos G, Markens S. Primary care physicians' concerns may affect adolescents' access to intrauterine contraception. Prim Care Community Health 2013;4(3):216-9.
  • Diaz VA, Hughes N, Dickerson LM, Wessell AM. Clinician knowledge about use of intrauterine devices in adolescents in South Carolina AHEC. Fam Med 2011;43(6):407-11.
  • Harper CC, Henderson JT, Raine TR, Goodman S, Darney PD, Thompson KM, et al. Evidence-based IUD practice: family physicians and obstetrician-gynecologists. Fam Med 2012;44(9):637-45.
  • Viberga I, Odlind V, Zodzika J. Practices and perceptions on intrauterine contraception among Latvian obstetrician-gynecologists. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2006;85(5):583-8.
  • Soysal S, Soysal ME. The efficacy of levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device in selected cases of myoma-related menorrhagia: a prospective controlled trial. Gynecol Obstet Invest 2005;59(1):29-35.
  • Jindabanjerd K, Taneepanichskul S. The use of levonorgestrel - IUD in the treatment of uterine myoma in Thai women. J Med Assoc Thai 2006;89(4):147-51.

The Knowledge Levels of Family Medicine Residents on Intrauterine Devices and the Effect of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Rotation on Their Knowledge Levels

Year 2016, Volume: 16 Issue: 2, 0 - 0, 20.05.2016
https://doi.org/10.17098/amj.19472

Abstract

Objective: This study aims to determine the knowledge, attitudes and opinions of family medicine residents about intrauterine contraceptive devices (IUD) in training and research hospitals in Izmir, Turkey. The effect of obstetrics and gynaecology rotation on the level of knowledge is discussed in this context.

Materials and Methods: A face to face interview questionnaire was applied to total of 61 family medicine residents from all the training and research hospitals in Izmir between June and July 2013. Merely volunteers were included in the study. Questions to measure the level of knowledge about copper and levonorgestrel IUD were prepared based on the WHO medical eligibility criteria for contraceptive use (fourth edition). Sixteen questions were constructed to examine the availability of copper and levonorgestrel IUD in nulliparity, adolescence, presence of diabetes, ectopic pregnancy, history of pelvic inflammatory diseases, obesity, hypertension, menorrhagia, uterine fibroids, uterine cavity distortion, iron deficiency anemia, deep vein thrombosis, history of breast cancer, urinary tract disease, epilepsy, HIV positivity and smoking presence. Answers of the availability states were presented as 4 multiple choices based on the WHO medical eligibility criteria for contraceptive use (fourth edition).

Results: Of the 61 family medicine residents included in this study, 63.9% of the residents have been on obstetrics and gynaecology rotations and 45.9% have previously practiced an IUD application. The association of correct answers with previous IUD application, obstetrics and gynaecology rotation and length (years) of professional experience has been investigated. Those who have been on obstetrics and gynaecology rotations had a statistically significant rate of correct answers about copper IUDs (p<0.05). Family medicine residents were able to identify the right indications of copper IUDs in nulliparous, obese and women with iron deficiency anemia, as well as hormonal IUDs in diabetic, nulliparous and women with breast cancer.

Conclusion: Obstetrics and gynecology rotation in Family Medicine specialization has positive effect on the residents’ knowledge level about intrauterin devices.

 

References

  • Guttmacher institute. US teenage pregnancies, birth, and abortions: national and state trends and trends by race and ethnicity 2010. www.Guttmacher.org/pubs/USTPtrends.pdf, (Erişim tarihi: 12.11.2015).
  • Finer LB, Henshaw SK. Disparities in rates of unintended pregnancy in the United States, 1994 and 2001. Perspect Sex Reprod Health 2006;38(2):90-6.
  • Brown SS, Eisenberg L. The best intentions: unintended pregnancy and the well being of children and families, Washington DC: National Academy Press; 1995.
  • Scholle SH, Chang JC, Harman J, McNeil M. Trends in women's health services by type of physician seen: data from the 1985 and 1997-98 NAMCS. Womens Health 2002;12(4):165-77.
  • World Health Organization. Comparing typical effectiveness of contraceptive methods. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2006.
  • Trussell J. The essential of contraception: efficacy, safety and personel consideration. In: Hatcher RA, Trussel J, Nelson AL, Cates W, Stewart FH, Kowal D, eds. Contraceptive Technology, 19th edition. Newyork: Ardent Media; 2007:19-47.
  • Türkiye nüfus sağlık araştırması 2013. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Nüfus Etütleri Enstitüsü. http://www.hips.hacettepe.edu.tr/TNSA2013_sonuclar_sunum_2122014.pdf (Erişim tarihi: 23.07.2013).
  • United Nations Department of Economy and Social Affairs Population Division. World Contraceptive Use 2009.
  • http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/contraceptive2009/contracept2009_wallchart_front.pdf, (Erişim tarihi: 23.07.2013).
  • Mosher WD, Jones J. Use of contraception in the United States: 1982-2008. National Center for Health Statistics. Vital Health Stat 2010;(29):1-44.
  • Bello JK, Rao G, Stulberg DB. Trends in contraceptive and preconception care in United States ambulatory practices. Fam Med 2015;47(4):264-71.
  • Nigeria.Konje JC, Oladini F, Otolorin EO, Ladipo OO. Factors determining the choice of contraceptive methods at the Family Planning Clinic, University College Hospital, Ibadan. Br J Fam Plann 1998;24(3):107-10.
  • Rubin SE, Fletcher J, Stein T, Segall-Gutierrez P, Gold M. Determinants of intrauterine contraception provision among US family physicians: a national survey of knowledge, attitudes and practice. Contraception 2011;83(5):472-8.
  • Harper CC, Henderson JT, Raine TR, Goodman S, Darney PD, Thompson KM, et al. Evidence-based IUD practice: family physicians and obstetrician-gynecologists. Fam Med 2012;44(9):637-45.
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention US. Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use, 2010. http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/pdf/rr/rr59e0528.pdf, (Erişim tarihi: 01.10.2014).
  • World Health Organization. Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use fourth edition. http://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/publications/family_planning/9789241563888/en, (Erişim tarihi:23.07.2013).
  • Mıhçıokur S, Akın A. Bazı Aile Hekimlerinin Aile Planlaması Hizmeti Sunma Durumu ve Aile Sağlığı Merkezlerinde Aile Planlaması Hizmet Sunumu İle İlgili Görüşleri. 16. Ulusal Halk Sağlığı Kongresi. http://halksagligiokulu.org/anasayfa/components/com_booklibrary/ebooks/16.UHSK%20Kitap.pdf, (Erişim tarihi: 03.08.2014).
  • Menéndez VC, Fernández DMJ, Doval CXL, Blanco PS, García MA, Gulín GR. Comparison of family physicians' and gynecologists' use of the intrauterine device (IUD). Aten Primaria 1998;22(10):622-6.
  • Weisberg E, Fraser IS, Goss S. The decline in popularity of the intrauterine device. A survey of general practitioner attitudes and practices in New South Wales. Med J Aust 1994;160(1):19-21.
  • Espey E, Ogburn T, Espey D, Etsitty V. IUD-related knowledge, attitudes and practices among Navajo Area Indian Health Service providers. Perspect Sex Reprod Health 2003;35(4):169-73.
  • Rubin SE, Campos G, Markens S. Primary care physicians' concerns may affect adolescents' access to intrauterine contraception. Prim Care Community Health 2013;4(3):216-9.
  • Diaz VA, Hughes N, Dickerson LM, Wessell AM. Clinician knowledge about use of intrauterine devices in adolescents in South Carolina AHEC. Fam Med 2011;43(6):407-11.
  • Harper CC, Henderson JT, Raine TR, Goodman S, Darney PD, Thompson KM, et al. Evidence-based IUD practice: family physicians and obstetrician-gynecologists. Fam Med 2012;44(9):637-45.
  • Viberga I, Odlind V, Zodzika J. Practices and perceptions on intrauterine contraception among Latvian obstetrician-gynecologists. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2006;85(5):583-8.
  • Soysal S, Soysal ME. The efficacy of levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device in selected cases of myoma-related menorrhagia: a prospective controlled trial. Gynecol Obstet Invest 2005;59(1):29-35.
  • Jindabanjerd K, Taneepanichskul S. The use of levonorgestrel - IUD in the treatment of uterine myoma in Thai women. J Med Assoc Thai 2006;89(4):147-51.
There are 26 citations in total.

Details

Journal Section Research Articles
Authors

Muzaffer Temur

Haluk Mergen

Özgür Yılmaz

Umut Gök Balcı This is me

Yusuf Adnan Güçlü

Hüseyin Can

Hasret Korkmaz This is me

Pelin Özün Özbay This is me

Fatma Eskicioğlu This is me

Publication Date May 20, 2016
Published in Issue Year 2016 Volume: 16 Issue: 2

Cite

APA Temur, M., Mergen, H., Yılmaz, Ö., Balcı, U. G., et al. (2016). The Knowledge Levels of Family Medicine Residents on Intrauterine Devices and the Effect of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Rotation on Their Knowledge Levels. Ankara Medical Journal, 16(2). https://doi.org/10.17098/amj.19472
AMA Temur M, Mergen H, Yılmaz Ö, Balcı UG, Güçlü YA, Can H, Korkmaz H, Özbay PÖ, Eskicioğlu F. The Knowledge Levels of Family Medicine Residents on Intrauterine Devices and the Effect of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Rotation on Their Knowledge Levels. Ankara Med J. May 2016;16(2). doi:10.17098/amj.19472
Chicago Temur, Muzaffer, Haluk Mergen, Özgür Yılmaz, Umut Gök Balcı, Yusuf Adnan Güçlü, Hüseyin Can, Hasret Korkmaz, Pelin Özün Özbay, and Fatma Eskicioğlu. “The Knowledge Levels of Family Medicine Residents on Intrauterine Devices and the Effect of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Rotation on Their Knowledge Levels”. Ankara Medical Journal 16, no. 2 (May 2016). https://doi.org/10.17098/amj.19472.
EndNote Temur M, Mergen H, Yılmaz Ö, Balcı UG, Güçlü YA, Can H, Korkmaz H, Özbay PÖ, Eskicioğlu F (May 1, 2016) The Knowledge Levels of Family Medicine Residents on Intrauterine Devices and the Effect of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Rotation on Their Knowledge Levels. Ankara Medical Journal 16 2
IEEE M. Temur, “The Knowledge Levels of Family Medicine Residents on Intrauterine Devices and the Effect of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Rotation on Their Knowledge Levels”, Ankara Med J, vol. 16, no. 2, 2016, doi: 10.17098/amj.19472.
ISNAD Temur, Muzaffer et al. “The Knowledge Levels of Family Medicine Residents on Intrauterine Devices and the Effect of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Rotation on Their Knowledge Levels”. Ankara Medical Journal 16/2 (May 2016). https://doi.org/10.17098/amj.19472.
JAMA Temur M, Mergen H, Yılmaz Ö, Balcı UG, Güçlü YA, Can H, Korkmaz H, Özbay PÖ, Eskicioğlu F. The Knowledge Levels of Family Medicine Residents on Intrauterine Devices and the Effect of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Rotation on Their Knowledge Levels. Ankara Med J. 2016;16. doi:10.17098/amj.19472.
MLA Temur, Muzaffer et al. “The Knowledge Levels of Family Medicine Residents on Intrauterine Devices and the Effect of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Rotation on Their Knowledge Levels”. Ankara Medical Journal, vol. 16, no. 2, 2016, doi:10.17098/amj.19472.
Vancouver Temur M, Mergen H, Yılmaz Ö, Balcı UG, Güçlü YA, Can H, Korkmaz H, Özbay PÖ, Eskicioğlu F. The Knowledge Levels of Family Medicine Residents on Intrauterine Devices and the Effect of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Rotation on Their Knowledge Levels. Ankara Med J. 2016;16(2).