Warner P, Critchley H O, Lumsden M A, Campbell-Brown M, Douglas A, Murray G
Public Health Sciences, Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Edinburgh Medical School, Edinburgh EH8 9AG.
BMJ. 2001 Jul 7;323(7303):24-8. doi: 10.1136/bmj.323.7303.24.
To describe the menstrual experience of women referred for menstrual problems, in particular menorrhagia (excessive menstrual loss), and to assess associations with reasons for referral given by their general practitioners, the women's understanding of the reasons for their attendance at the hospital clinics, and clinic outcome.
Questionnaire survey, with partial review of case notes after 8 months.
Three hospital gynaecology clinics in Glasgow and Edinburgh.
952 women completed the questionnaire, and the first 665 were reviewed.
Reason for referral, women's reported menstrual problems and reason for clinic attendance, diagnosis, and treatment.
Only 38% (95% confidence interval 34% to 41%) of women reported excessive menstrual loss as a severe problem. However 60% (57-63%) gave it as reason for attending a clinic, and 76% (73-79%) of general practitioners gave it as reason for referral. Reason for referral was significantly biased towards bleeding (McNemar odds ratio 4.01, 3.0 to 5.3, P<0.001) and against pain (0.54, 0.4 to 0.7, P<0.001). Dysfunctional uterine bleeding was diagnosed in 37% (31-42%) of the 259 women who gave as reason for attendance something other than bleeding. Women who were economically disadvantaged differed in prevalence of the main diagnoses and were more likely to fail to reattend. Hysterectomy was associated with referral for bleeding (relative risk 4.9, 1.6 to 15.6, P<0.001) but not with the patient stating bleeding as the reason for clinic attendance.
Intolerance of the volume of their bleeding is not a key feature among women attending clinics for bleeding problems. Broad menstrual complaint tends to be reframed as excessive bleeding at referral and during management. This may result in women receiving inappropriate care. Conceptualisation and assessment of menorrhagia requires reconsideration.
描述因月经问题(尤其是月经过多,即月经量过多)前来就诊的女性的月经经历,并评估其与全科医生给出的转诊原因、女性对前往医院门诊就诊原因的理解以及门诊治疗结果之间的关联。
问卷调查,并在8个月后对病例记录进行部分回顾。
格拉斯哥和爱丁堡的三家医院妇科门诊。
952名女性完成了问卷调查,对前665名女性进行了回顾。
转诊原因、女性报告的月经问题及门诊就诊原因、诊断和治疗情况。
只有38%(95%置信区间为34%至41%)的女性报告月经量过多是一个严重问题。然而,60%(57 - 63%)的女性将其作为前往门诊就诊的原因,76%(73 - 79%)的全科医生将其作为转诊原因。转诊原因明显偏向于出血(麦克内马优势比4.01,3.0至5.3,P<0.001)而不利于疼痛(0.54,0.4至0.7,P<0.001)。在259名因非出血原因前来就诊的女性中,37%(31 - 42%)被诊断为功能性子宫出血。经济上处于不利地位的女性在主要诊断的患病率方面存在差异,且更有可能不再前来复诊。子宫切除术与因出血而转诊相关(相对风险4.9,1.6至15.6,P<0.001),但与患者将出血作为前往门诊就诊的原因无关。
对于因出血问题前往门诊就诊的女性来说,对出血量的不耐受并非关键特征。广泛的月经问题在转诊和治疗过程中往往被重新界定为月经过多。这可能导致女性接受不恰当的治疗。月经过多的概念化和评估需要重新考虑。