• Pauline Williams, Peter Murchie, Maggie E Cruickshank, Christine M Bond, and Christopher D Burton.
• Aberdeen Centre for Women's Health Research, Institute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen Maternity Hospital, Aberdeen.
• Br J Gen Pract. 2023 Jul 1; 73 (732): e528e536e528-e536.

BackgroundOmission of pelvic examination (PE) has been associated with diagnostic delay in women diagnosed with gynaecological cancer. However, PEs are often not carried out by GPs.AimTo determine the perceptions of GPs about the role of PEs, the barriers to and facilitators of PEs, and GPs' experience of PEs in practice.Design And SettingQualitative semi-structured interview study conducted in one health board in Scotland (mixed urban and rural) with an approximate population of 500 000.MethodInterviews were conducted face-to-face or by telephone between March and June 2019. Framework analysis used the COM-B behaviour change model concepts of capability, opportunity, and motivation.ResultsData was compatible with all three domains of the COM-B framework. Capability related to training in and maintenance of skills. These went beyond carrying out the examination to interpreting it reliably. Opportunity related to the clinical environment and the provision of chaperones for intimate examination. Interviewees described a range of motivations towards or against PEs that were unrelated to either capability or opportunity. These all related to providing high-quality care, but this was defined in different ways: 'doing what is best for the individual', 'doctors examine', and 'GPs as pragmatists'.ConclusionGPs' reasons for carrying out, or not carrying out, PEs in women with symptoms potentially indicating cancer are complex. The COM-B framework provides a way of understanding this complexity. Interventions to increase the use of PEs, and critics of its non-use, need to consider these multiple factors.© The Authors.

15 keywords...

hide…