Johansen R Elise B, Ziyada Mai Mahgoub, Shell-Duncan Bettina, Kaplan Adriana Marcusàn, Leye Els
Norwegian Centre for Violence and Traumatic Stress Studies, PB: 181 Nydalen, 0409, Oslo, Norway.
Department of Anthropology, University of Washington, M230 Denny Hall, Box 353100, Seattle, WA, 98195-3100, USA.
BMC Health Serv Res. 2018 Apr 4;18(1):240. doi: 10.1186/s12913-018-3033-x.
For the last decades, the international community has emphasised the importance of a multisectoral approach to tackle female genital mutilation (FGM/C). While considerable improvement concerning legislations and community involvement is reported, little is known about the involvement of the health sector.
A mixed methods approach was employed to map the involvement of the health sector in the management of FGM/C both in countries where FGM/C is a traditional practice (countries of origin), and countries where FGM/C is practiced mainly by migrant populations (countries of migration). Data was collected in 2016 using a pilot-tested questionnaire from 30 countries (11 countries of origin and 19 countries of migration). In 2017, interviews were conducted to check for data accuracy and to request relevant explanations. Qualitative data was used to elucidate the quantitative data.
A total of 24 countries had a policy on FGM/C, of which 19 had assigned coordination bodies and 20 had partially or fully implemented the plans. Nevertheless, allocation of funding and incorporation of monitoring and evaluation systems was lacking in 11 and 13 of these countries respectively. The level of the health sectors' involvement varied considerably across and within countries. Systematic training of healthcare providers (HCP) was more prevalent in countries of origin, whereas involvement of HCP in the prevention of FGM/C was more prevalent in countries of migration. Most countries reported to forbid HCP from conducting FGM/C on both minors and adults, but not consistently forbidding re-infibulation. Availability of healthcare services for girls and women with FGM/C related complications also varied between countries dependent on the type of services. Deinfibulation was available in almost all countries, while clitoral reconstruction and psychological and sexual counselling were available predominantly in countries of migration and then in less than half the countries. Finally, systematic recording of FGM/C in medical records was completely lacking in countries of origin and very limited in countries of migration.
Substantial progress has been made in the involvement of the health sector in both the treatment and prevention of FGM/C. Still, there are several areas in need for improvement, particularly monitoring and evaluation.
在过去几十年里,国际社会一直强调采取多部门方法来应对女性生殖器切割/残割(FGM/C)。虽然据报道在立法和社区参与方面有了显著改善,但对于卫生部门的参与情况却知之甚少。
采用混合方法来梳理卫生部门在FGM/C传统习俗存在的国家(原籍国)以及FGM/C主要由移民群体实施的国家(移民接收国)中对FGM/C管理的参与情况。2016年使用经过预测试的问卷从30个国家(11个原籍国和19个移民接收国)收集数据。2017年进行访谈以检查数据准确性并要求提供相关解释。定性数据用于阐释定量数据。
共有24个国家制定了关于FGM/C的政策,其中19个国家指定了协调机构,20个国家部分或全部实施了计划。然而,这些国家中分别有11个和13个国家缺乏资金分配以及监测和评估系统的纳入。卫生部门的参与程度在不同国家之间以及国家内部差异很大。对医疗服务提供者(HCP)的系统培训在原籍国更为普遍,而HCP在预防FGM/C方面的参与在移民接收国更为普遍。大多数国家报告称禁止HCP对未成年人和成年人实施FGM/C,但并非始终禁止再次缝合。对于有FGM/C相关并发症的女孩和妇女,医疗服务的可及性在不同国家也因服务类型而异。几乎所有国家都提供去缝合手术,而阴蒂重建以及心理和性咨询主要在移民接收国提供,且只有不到一半的国家提供。最后,原籍国完全缺乏在医疗记录中对FGM/C的系统记录,而在移民接收国非常有限。
卫生部门在FGM/C的治疗和预防方面的参与取得了重大进展。然而,仍有几个方面需要改进,特别是监测和评估。