Pratisyen Hekimlerin Sünnetle İlgili Bilgi Düzeyleri

Levent Cankorkmaz; Gökhan Köylüoğlu; Selma Çetinkaya

doi:10.5174/tutfd.2010.03758.4

General Practitioner Knowledge Levels About Circumcision

Year 2011, , 264 - 268, 01.03.2011

Levent Cankorkmaz Gökhan Köylüoğlu Selma Çetinkaya

https://doi.org/10.5174/tutfd.2010.03758.4

Abstract

Objective: This study was carried out to investigate knowledge levels of general practitioners and their thoughts about circumcision in Middle Anatolia. Materials and Methods: This descriptive and cross-sectional study was carried out with 247 general practitioners working in Sivas. A questionnaire was prepared by the authors using previous reports. Questionnaires were sent to subjects by post. One hundred and seventy eight general practitioners (57 women, 121 men) responded and were included in the study. For statistical analysis, Chi-square test was used and p&lt;0.05 value was accepted as significant. Results: 42.1% of subjects believed that circumcision should be performed between 2 and 6 years of age. 2.2% of subjects declared that circumcision could be done at home and 7.3% believed that the location of the operation is not important. 9.6% of subjects believed that the person who performs the circumcision does not have to be a doctor. 21.3% of subjects believed that circumcision could be performed without anesthesia during the newborn period because of undeveloped pain sensation. Conclusion: This study demonstrated that general practitioners, who are the most easily accessible health staff for information about health, do not have updated information about the way to perform circumcision and its necessity. Therefore, it is concluded that education programs about circumcision for general practitioners must be continued and updated. Turkish Başlık: Pratisyen Hekimlerin Sünnetle İlgili Bilgi Düzeyleri Anahtar Kelimeler: Sünnet, pratisyen hekim, tıp eğitimi Amaç: Bu çalışma Orta Anadolu&#39;daki pratisyen hekimlerin sünnetle ilgili düşünce ve bilgi düzeylerinin saptanması amacıyla gerçekleştirildi. Gereç ve Yöntemler: Kesitsel ve tanımlayıcı bir araştırma olarak planlanan çalışma, Sivas il sınırları içinde çalışmakta olan pratisyen hekimler arasında yapıldı (n=247). Anket formu, araştırmacılar tarafından literatür ışığında hazırlandı. Anketler posta yoluyla gönderildi. Toplam 178 hekim (erkek=121, kadın=57) anket formunu uygun olarak yanıtladı. Karşılaştırmalarda &chi;2 testi kullanıldı; anlamlılık düzeyi olarak p&lt;0.05 kabul edildi. Bulgular: Hekimlerin %42.1&#39;i 2-6 yaş arasında sünnet yapılmasını önerirken, %2.2&#39;si sünnetin evde yapılması gerektiğini, %7.3&#39;ü de yapılan yerin bir önemi olmadığını belirtmiştir. Sünnetin kim tarafından yapılmasının uygun olduğu sorusuna ise %9.6&#39;sı yapan kişinin önemi olmadığını söylemiştir. Sünnetin yapılma şekliyle ilgili olarak da %21.3&#39;ü yenidoğan döneminde ağrı duyusu gelişmediği için anestezi uygulanmadan sünnet yapılabileceğini belirtmiştir. Sonuç: En kolay ulaşılabilen, sağlıklı bilgi alınabilecek hekim grubu olan pratisyen hekimlerin sünnetin gerekliliği ve yapılma şekliyle ilgili güncel bilgi eksiklikleri mevcuttur. Pratisyen hekimlerin sünnet konusunda bilgilerinin güncellenmesi ve eğitimlerinin sürdürülmesi gereklidir.

Keywords

Circumcision, general practitioner, medical education

References

Hammond T. A preliminary poll of men circumcised in infancy or childhood. BJU Int 1999;83:85-92. [CrossRef]
Özdemir E. Significantly increased complicasion risk with mass. Br J Urol. 1997;80:136-9.
Gatrad AR, Sheikh A, Jacks H. Religious circumcision and the human rights act. Arch Dis Child 2002;86:76-8. [CrossRef]
Schoen EJ, Colby CJ, Ray GT. Newborn circumcision decreases incidence and costs of urinary tract infections during the first year of life. Pediatrics 2000;105:789-93. [CrossRef]
El-Hout Y, Khauli RB. The case for routine circumcision. JMH 2007;3:300-5. [CrossRef]
Dickson NP, van Roode T, Herbison P, Paul C. Circumcision and Risk of Sexually Transmitted Infections in a Birth Cohort. J Pediatr 2008;152:383-7. [CrossRef]
Newell ML, Bärnighausen T. Male circumcision to cut HIV risk in the general population. Lancet 2007;369:617-9. [CrossRef]
Patterson BK, Landay A, Siegel JN, Flener Z, Pessis D, Chaviano A, et al. Susceptibility to human immunodeficiency virus-1 infection of human foreskin and cervical tissue grown in explant culture. Am J Pathol 2002;161:867-73. [CrossRef]
Soilleux EJ, Coleman N. Expression of DC-SIGN in human foreskin may facilitate sexual transmission of HIV. J Clin Pathol 2004;57:77-8. [CrossRef]
Zoossmann-Diskin A. Relation of male circumcision to cervical cancer, sexuality and female circumcision. JMGH 2007;4:448-53. [CrossRef]
Marild S, Jodal U. Incidence rate of first-time symptomatic urinary tract infection in children under 6 years of age. Acta Paediatr 1998;87:549-52.
Kinkade S, Meadows S, Gracia-Trujillo J. Clinical inquiries. Does neonatal circumcision decrease morbidity? J Fam Pract 2005;54:81-2.
Şahin F, Beyazova U, Aktürk A. Attitudes and practices regarding circumcision in Turkey. Child Care Health Dev 2003;29:275-80.
Cascio S, Colhoun E, Puri P. Bacterial colonization of the prepuce in boys with vesicoureteral reflux who receive antibiotic prophylaxis. J Pediatr 2001;139:160-2. [CrossRef]
Herzog LW, Alvarez SR. The frequency of foreskin problems in uncircumcised children. Am J Dis Child 1986;140:254-6.
Frisch M, Friis S, Kjaer SK, Melbye M. Falling incidence of penile cancer in an uncircumcised population (Denmark 1943-90). BMJ 1995;311:1471.
Sivaslı E, Bozkurt Aİ, Ceylan H, Coşkun Y. Gaziantep bölgesindeki anne ve babaların sünnet ile ilgili bilgi, tutum ve davranışları. Çocuk Sağlığı ve Hastalıkları Dergisi 2003;46:114-8.
Yakıncı CY, Şahin S, Paç FA, Karabiber H, Balbay MD, Yoloğlu S. Circumcision Investigation In Malatya. T Klin J Pediatr 1996;5:64-7.
Balkan E, Kılıç N. Sünnet ve Komplikasyonları. The Journal of Cur rent Pediatrics 2005;2:22-3.
Anand KJ, Hickey PR. Pain and its effects in the human neonate and fetus. N Engl J Med 1987;317:1321-9. [CrossRef]
American Academy of Pediatrics. Report of the Task Force on Circumcision. Pediatrics 1989;84:388-91. [CrossRef]
Yılmaz E, Batislam E, Basar MM, Basar H. Psychological trauma of circumcision in the phallic period could be avoided by using topical steroids. Int J Urol 2003;10:651-6. [CrossRef]
Balkan E, Kırkpınar A, Kılıç N, Halil T, Yeşilyurt A, Doğruyol H. Çocuklarda geri çekilemeyen prepusiyum. Gülhane Tıp Derg 2004;46:29-32.
Circumcision policy statement. American Academy of Pediatrics. Task Force on Circumcision. Pediatrics 1999;103:686-93. [CrossRef]
Alanis MC, Lucidi RS. Neonatal circumcision: a review of the world’s oldest and most controversial operation. Obstet Gynecol Surv 2004;59:379-95. [CrossRef]
Elder JS. Abnormalities of the genitalia in boys and their surgical management. In: Walsh PC, Retik AB, Vaughan ED Jr, et al, editors. Campbell’s urology. 8th ed. Philadelphia: WB Saunders; 2002. p. 2387-9.
Persad R, Sharma S, McTavish J, Imber C, Mouriquand PD. Clinical presentation and pathophysiology of meatal stenosis following circumcision. Br J Urol 1995;75:91-3. [CrossRef]
McAninch JW. Disorders of penis and male urethra. In: Tanagho EA, McAninch JW, editors. Smith’s general urology. 15th ed. New York (USA): Lange Medical Books/McGraw-Hill 2000. p. 661-75. [CrossRef]
Kavaklı K, Kurugöl Z, Nişli G. Hemofilik çocuklar sünnet edilmeli mi? T Klin J Pediatr 1999;8:189-93.
Laumann EO, Masi CM, Zuckerman EW. Circumcision in the United States. JAMA 1997;277:1052-7. [CrossRef]
Masters WH, Johnson VE. Human Sexual Response. Boston, MA: Little, Brown and Company 1966;189-91. [CrossRef]
Taylor JR, Lockwood AP, Taylor AJ. The prepuce: specialized mucosa of the penis and its loss to circumcision. Br J Urol 1996;77:291-5. [CrossRef]