UCL Elizabeth Garrett Anderson Institute of Women's Health, University College Hospital, London, UK.
BMJ Open. 2012 Nov 21;2(6). doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001908. Print 2012.
Women who are contemplating any form of female genital cosmetic surgery (FGCS) are likely to seek information from provider websites. The aim of this study is to examine the breadth, depth and quality of clinical information communicated to women on 10 popular sites and to discuss the implications of the results.
The content of online advertisement from 10 private providers that offer FGCS procedures was examined according to 16 information categories relating to indications for surgery, types of procedure, risks and benefits.
FGCS procedures were presented on all of the provider websites as an effective treatment for genital appearance concerns. No explanation for presenting clinical complaints was found. There was scanty reference to appearance diversity. Only minimal scientific information on outcomes or risks could be identified. There was no mention of potential alternative ways for managing appearance concerns or body dissatisfaction.
The quality and quantity of clinical information in FGCS provider sites is poor, with erroneous information in some instances. Impeccable professionalism and ethical integrity is crucial for this controversial practice. Clear and detailed guidelines on how to raise the standard of information to women on all aspects of FGCS are urgently needed.
考虑任何形式的女性生殖器整形手术(FGCS)的女性可能会从提供者的网站上寻求信息。本研究的目的是检查 10 个热门网站向女性传达的临床信息的广度、深度和质量,并讨论结果的意义。
根据与手术适应症、手术类型、风险和益处相关的 16 个信息类别,对 10 家提供 FGCS 手术的私人提供者的在线广告内容进行了检查。
所有提供者的网站都将 FGCS 手术作为治疗生殖器外观问题的有效方法。没有发现对呈现临床投诉的解释。对外貌多样性的提及很少。只能确定关于结果或风险的最小科学信息。没有提到潜在的替代方法来管理外观问题或身体不满。
FGCS 提供者网站的临床信息质量和数量都很差,有些信息是错误的。对于这种有争议的做法,无可挑剔的专业精神和道德操守至关重要。迫切需要制定关于如何提高女性对 FGCS 各个方面信息标准的清晰和详细的指导方针。