Female genital mutilation and cutting: a systematic literature review of health professionals’ knowledge, attitudes and clinical practice

Zurynski, Yvonne; Sureshkumar, Premala; Phu, Amy; Elliott, Elizabeth

doi:10.1186/s12914-015-0070-y

BMC International Health and Human Rights

Table 1 Characteristics of studies included in the review

From: Female genital mutilation and cutting: a systematic literature review of health professionals’ knowledge, attitudes and clinical practice

Reference	Country	Study design and method	Domains assessed			Sample	N	Response rate
			Attitudes	Knowledge	Practice
Publications from African Countries
Ashimi et al. 2014 [21]	Nigeria	Cross-sectional; self- administered survey	Yes	Yes	No	Nurses	350	84 %
Kaplan et al. 2013 [22]	Gambia	Cross-sectional; survey administered face to face	Yes	Yes	Yes	Nurses, community nurses and midwives	468	NR
Ali et al. 2012 [23]	Sudan	Survey administered via face to face interview	Yes	Yes	Yes	Midwives (~63 % of midwives were illiterate)	157	NR
Dike et al. 2012 [24]	Nigeria	Cross-sectional survey	Yes	Yes	No	Student nurses and midwives	269	95.7 %
Rasheed et al. 2011 [25]	Egypt	Cross sectional; self- administered survey	Yes	No	Yes	^aNurses; junior and senior physicians
Refaat 2009 [26]	Egypt	Cross-sectional Survey	Yes	Yes	Yes	^aPhysicians	193	68 %
Mostafa et al. 2006 [27]	Egypt	Random sample; Survey	Yes	Yes	No	5^th year medical students	330	90.3 %
Onuh et al. 2006 [28]	Nigeria	Cross-sectional; Survey	Yes	Yes	Yes	Nurses practising in a hospital	182	94.3 %
Publications from “Western Countries”
Caroppo et al. 2014 [29]	Italy	Purposive sample; Self-administered survey	No	Yes	Yes	Physicians, social workers, psychologists, “health assistants” working in an asylum seeker centre	41	100 %
Purchase et al. 2013 [30]	UK	Cross-sectional; survey	No	Yes	No	Obstetricians and Gynaecologists	607	20.1 %
Relph et al. 2013 [31]	UK	Cross-sectional; Survey	Yes	Yes	No	Health care professionals	79	92.9 %
Moeed et al. 2012 [20]	Australia and New Zealand	Cross- sectional; Survey	No	Yes	Yes	Obstetricians and Gynaecologists and trainees	564	18.5 %
Moeed et al. 2012 [20]	Australia and New Zealand	Cross- sectional; Survey	No	Yes	Yes	FGM/C workers	34	91.9 %
Hess et al. 2010 [32]	USA	Randomised Survey	Yes	Yes	Yes	Nurse-midwives	243	40.3 %
Kaplan-Marcusan et al. 2009 [33]	Spain	Cross-sectional; Survey at two time points (2001 and 2004)	Yes	Yes	Yes	^bPrimary health care professionals	280 (2001)	80 % (2001)
Kaplan-Marcusan et al. 2009 [33]	Spain	Cross-sectional; Survey at two time points (2001 and 2004)	Yes	Yes	Yes	^bPrimary health care professionals	296 (2004)	62 % (2004)
Leye 2008 [34]	Belgium	Cross-sectional; Survey	Yes	Yes	Yes	Gynaecologists and trainees	333	46 %
Zaidi et al. 2007 [35]	UK	Cross-sectional; Survey	No	Yes	Yes	Labour ward staff	45	100 %
Tamaddon et al. 2006 [36]	Sweden	Cross-sectional; Survey	No	Yes	Yes	^bHealth professionals	796	28 %
Jager et al. 2002 [37]	Switzerland	Cross-sectional; Survey	No	Yes	Yes	Obstetricians and gynaecologists	454	39.1 %

^aSample included paediatricians but did not report on paediatricians separately;
^bSample included paediatricians and paediatricians were compared with other professionals;
NA Not applicable
NR Not Reported

Back to article page

ISSN: 1472-698X

Contact us

General enquiries: ORSupport@springernature.com