Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16371153›Full record

ArticleBMC family practice2005

Chaperone use during intimate examinations in primary care: postal survey of family physicians.

David H Price, C Shawn Tracy, Ross E G Upshur

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC family practice, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
10.2field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. What influences GPs' use of pelvic examination? A qualitative investigation in primary care.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. What should GPs be doing about chaperones?The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2014
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Patients' attitude towards the use of a chaperone in breast examination.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2009
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Chaperones: are we protecting patients?The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2008
    Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

David H PriceDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, Sunnybrook and Women's College Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON M4N 3M5, Canada. davidhprice@gmail.com
C Shawn Tracy
Ross E G Upshur
Health Sciences Centre · CAPublic Health Ontario · CASunnybrook Health Science Centre · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPhysicians have long been advised to have a third party present during certain parts of a physical examination; however, little is known about the frequency of chaperone use for those specific intimate examinations regularly performed in primary care. We aimed to determine the frequency of chaperone use among family physicians across a variety of intimate physical examinations for both male and female patients, and also to identify the factors associated with chaperone use.

methodsQuestionnaires were mailed to a randomly selected sample of 500 Ontario members of the College of Family Physicians of Canada. Participants were asked about their use of chaperones when performing a variety of intimate examinations, namely female pelvic, breast, and rectal exams and male genital and rectal exams.

results276 of 500 were returned (56%), of which 257 were useable. Chaperones were more commonly used with female patients than with males (t = 9.09 [df = 249], p < 0.001), with the female pelvic exam being the most likely of the five exams to be attended by a chaperone (53%). As well, male physicians were more likely to use chaperones for examination of female patients than were female physicians for the examination of male patients. Logistic regression analyses identified two independent factors--sex of physician and availability of a nurse--that were significantly associated with chaperone use. For female pelvic exam, male physicians were significantly more likely to report using a chaperone (adjusted Odds Ratio [OR] 40.62, 95% confidence interval [CI] 16.91-97.52). Likewise, having a nurse available also significantly increased the likelihood of a chaperone being used (adjusted OR 6.92, 95% CI 2.74-17.46). This pattern of results was consistent across the other four exams. Approximately two-thirds of respondents reported using nurses as chaperones, 15% cited the use of other office staff, and 10% relied on the presence of a family member.

conclusionClinical practice concerning the use of chaperones during intimate exams continues to be discordant with the recommendations of medical associations and medico-legal societies. Chaperones are used by only a minority of Ontario family physicians. Chaperone use is higher for examinations of female patients than of male patients and is highest for female pelvic exams. The availability of a nurse in the clinic to act as a chaperone is associated with more frequent use of chaperones.

Indexed as

Office VisitsPhysician-Patient RelationsAdultBreast DiseasesCross-Sectional StudiesFamily PracticeFemaleGenital Diseases, FemaleGenital Diseases, MaleGuidelines as TopicHealth Care SurveysHumansMaleMiddle AgedNursesOntario

Identifiers

PMID16371153
PMCPMC1360073
OpenAlexW1509587857

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.