Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorJones, Laura L
dc.contributor.authorCostello, Benjamin D
dc.contributor.authorDanks, Emma
dc.contributor.authorJolly, Kate
dc.contributor.authorCross-Sudworth, Fiona
dc.contributor.authorByrne, Alison
dc.contributor.authorFassam-Wright, Meg
dc.contributor.authorLatthe, Pallavi
dc.contributor.authorClarke, Joanne
dc.contributor.authorAdbi, Ayan
dc.contributor.authorAbdi, Hodo
dc.contributor.authorAbdi, Hibaq
dc.contributor.authorTaylor, Julie
dc.date.accessioned2023-11-01T15:27:55Z
dc.date.available2023-11-01T15:27:55Z
dc.date.issued2022-12-26
dc.identifier.citationJones LL, Costello BD, Danks E, Jolly K, Cross-Sudworth F, Byrne A, Fassam-Wright M, Latthe P, Clarke J, Adbi A, Abdi H, Abdi H, Taylor J. Preferences for deinfibulation (opening) surgery and female genital mutilation service provision: A qualitative study. BJOG. 2023 Apr;130(5):531-540. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.17358. Epub 2022 Dec 26en_US
dc.identifier.issn1470-0328
dc.identifier.eissn1471-0528
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/1471-0528.17358
dc.identifier.pmid36572653
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14200/2751
dc.description.abstractObjective: To explore the views of female genital mutilation (FGM) survivors, men and healthcare professionals (HCPs) on the timing of deinfibulation surgery and NHS service provision. Design: Qualitative study informed by the sound of silence framework. Setting: Survivors and men were recruited from three FGM prevalent areas of England. HCPs and stakeholders were from across the UK. Sample: Forty-four survivors, 13 men and 44 HCPs. Ten participants at two community workshops and 30 stakeholders at a national workshop. Methods: Hybrid framework analysis of 101 interviews and three workshops. Results: There was no consensus across groups on the optimal timing of deinfibulation for survivors who wished to be deinfibulated. Within group, survivors expressed a preference for deinfibulation pre-pregnancy and HCPs antenatal deinfibulation. There was no consensus for men. Participants reported that deinfibulation should take place in a hospital setting and be undertaken by a suitable HCP. Decision making around deinfibulation was complex but for those who underwent surgery it helped to mitigate FGM impacts. Although there were examples of good practice, in general, FGM service provision was suboptimal. Conclusion: Deinfibulation services need to be widely advertised. Information should highlight that the procedure can be carried out at different time points, according to preference, and in a hospital by suitable HCPs. Future services should ideally be developed with survivors, to ensure that they are clinically and culturally appropriate. Guidelines would benefit from being updated to reflect the needs of survivors and to ensure consistency in provision.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherWileyen_US
dc.relation.urlhttp://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1471-0528en_US
dc.rights© 2022 The Authors. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
dc.subjectPsychologyen_US
dc.subjectPractice of medicineen_US
dc.subjectGynaecologyen_US
dc.subjectPaediatricsen_US
dc.subjectNursingen_US
dc.titlePreferences for deinfibulation (opening) surgery and female genital mutilation service provision: a qualitative study.en_US
dc.typeArticle
dc.source.journaltitleBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology
dc.source.volume130
dc.source.issue5
dc.source.beginpage531
dc.source.endpage540
dc.source.countryEngland
rioxxterms.versionNAen_US
dc.contributor.trustauthorByrne, Alison
dc.contributor.departmentObstetrics and Gynaecologyen_US
dc.contributor.roleMedical and Dentalen_US
oa.grant.openaccessnaen_US


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record