Observational studyWomen's health (London, England)
Clitoral reconstruction and psychosexual care after female genital mutilation/cutting: Assessment of multidisciplinary care.
Observational study in Women's health (London, England). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMultidisciplinary care following female genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C) can consist of surgical interventions such as clitoral reconstruction (CR) in combination with individualized psychosexual care (PC). Evidence on both treatments, alone or in association, is limited.
objectivesTo investigate the overall satisfaction with PC only or PC in combination with CR.
designCross-sectional study of women who attended the FGM/C outpatient clinic under study and asked for CR between January 2013 and November 2021.
methodsData were collected through questionnaire-based interviews on motivations for asking for CR, psychological well-being (World Health Organization-Five Well-Being Index), sexual response (Female Sexual Function Index), vulvar pain, genital self-image (Female Genital Self-Image Scale), overall satisfaction with the care received, and, in the case of CR, postoperative complications.
resultsThe 20 women included underwent therapy primarily to feel repaired or reconstructed and to improve their sexual function. Mean overall satisfaction with the care was rated 8.95/10 ± 1.39. Twelve (60%) received CR in combination with PC. Eight (40%) received PC only. Women who received combined therapy reported higher overall satisfaction (9.17 versus 8.57), psychological well-being (17.8 versus 9.25), sexual response (31.22 versus 21.56), and genital self-image (25.60 versus 17.60) in comparison with those who only received PC. The main surgical complications were minor postoperative bleeding and one painful wound infection triggering a relapse of posttraumatic stress disorder.
conclusionTailored PC and CR after FGM/C seem to improve psychosexual health, well-being, body image, and pain.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.