Background: This pilot study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of doula support in office hysteroscopy and the potential effectiveness of doula support during office hysteroscopy to reduce anxiety and pain. Methods: Twenty-eight women, median age 43.5 (range 21–73), with indications for office hysteroscopy received doula support (intervention) or routine care (control group) during the procedure. Feasibility was measured in terms of successful office hysteroscopies, duration, and adverse events. Outcome measures were Spielberg State-Trait Anxiety Inventory-S (STAI-S), and the Numeric Rate Scale (NRS) for pain intensity. Results: The results showed similar success rates, duration, and adverse events between the groups, with no differences in reported pain intensity. Both groups had high, comparable levels of anxiety before the procedure (Doula group mean STAI-S score = 45.4, control group = 45.8). After the procedure, the doula group showed slightly increased anxiety while the control group showed slightly decreased anxiety. There was a significant difference between groups favoring the control group when comparing STAI-S mean score post-procedure (48.6 in the Doula group versus 44.1 in the control group p = 0.033). However, when analyzing the mean change across groups (p = 0.205) that difference was not significant. Discussion: To conclude, this pilot study suggests that Doula support may be feasible but not superior to routine care support in office hysteroscopy. High anxiety levels may be more relevant than pain during the procedure. Further investigation of the state and trait anxiety in office hysteroscopy populations in different health care contexts is recommended.
Cite this article
Volume | Year
Open Access Original Research
Doula support in office hysteroscopy: results from a pilot study
1 Department of Research and Development, SV Hospital Group, 42422 Angered, Sweden
2 Department of Health and Rehabilitation, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, Centre for Ageing and Health, University of Gothenburg, AGECAP, 41138 Gothenburg, Sweden
3 Department of Health and Rehabilitation, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, 41138 Gothenburg, Sweden
*Correspondence: email@example.com (Rocio Montejo)
Clin. Exp. Obstet. Gynecol. 2021, 48(4), 955–961; https://doi.org/10.31083/j.ceog4804151
Submitted: 26 April 2021 | Revised: 8 May 2021 | Accepted: 8 June 2021 | Published: 15 August 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Modern trends in reproductive surgery)
Copyright: © 2021 The Author(s). Published by IMR Press.
This is an open access article under the CC BY 4.0 license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).