Management of Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting-Related Obstetric Complications: A Training Evaluation

9Citations
Citations of this article
59Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Although female genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C) is a prevalent practice in Liberia, healthcare workers lack the capacity to provide adequate care for FGM/C survivors. Therefore, Liberian nurses, physician assistants, midwives and trained traditional midwives were trained in sexual, obstetric and psychosocial care for FGM/C survivors in 2019. Through questionnaires, we assessed knowledge acquisition, trainee attitudes towards FGM/C care and acceptability to implement WHO-endorsed recommendations. The questionnaires were analyzed using descriptive statistics for quantitative data and an inductive approach for qualitative data. A total of 99 female and 34 male trainees participated. Most trainees perceived FGM/C as harmful to women’s health, as a violation of women’s rights and showed a willingness to change their clinical practice. While 82.8% (n = 74/90) perceived their role in advocating against FGM/C, 10.0% (n = 9/90) felt that they should train traditional circumcisers to practice FGM/C safely. The pre-training FGM/C knowledge test demonstrated higher scores among physician assistants (13.86 ± 3.02 points) than among nurses (12.11 ± 3.12 points) and midwives (11.75 ± 2.27 points). After the training, the mean test score increased by 1.69 points, from 12.18 (±2.91) points to 13.87 (±2.65) points. The trainings successfully increased theoretical knowledge of FGM/C-caused health effects and healthcare workers’ demonstrated willingness to implement evidence-based guidelines when providing care to FMG/C survivors.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Nordmann, K., Subirón-Valera, A. B., King, M., Küpper, T., & Martínez-Pérez, G. Z. (2022). Management of Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting-Related Obstetric Complications: A Training Evaluation. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(15). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19159209

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free