Search

Background Female genital mutilation is an important UK health-care challenge. There are no health benefits of female genital mutilation, and it is associated with lifelong physical, psychological and sexual impacts. The annual cost to the NHS to care for survivors is £100M. Deinfibulation may improve the health and well-being of some women, but there is no consensus on the optimal timing of surgery for type 3 survivors. UK care provision is reportedly suboptimal. Objectives We aimed to explore the views of survivors, men and health-care professionals on the timing of deinfibulation surgery and NHS service provision. Methods This was a qualitative study informed by the Sound of Silence framework. This framework is useful for researching sensitive issues and the health-care needs of marginalised populations. A total of 101 interviews with 44 survivors, 13 men and 44 health-care professionals were conducted, supplemented by two workshops with affected communities (participants, n = 10) and one workshop with stakeholders (participants, n = 30). Data were analysed using a hybrid framework method. Results There was no clear consensus between groups on the optimal timing of deinfibulation. However, within groups, survivors expressed a preference for deinfibulation pre pregnancy; health-care professionals preferred antenatal deinfibulation, with the caveat that it should be the survivor’s choice. There was no consensus among men. There was agreement that deinfibulation should take place in a hospital setting and be undertaken by a suitable health-care professional. Decision-making around deinfibulation was complex. Deficiencies in professionals’ awareness, knowledge and understanding resulted in impacts on the provision of appropriate care. Although there were examples of good practice and positive care interactions, in general, service provision was opaque and remains suboptimal, with deficiencies most notable in mental health. Deinfibulation reportedly helps to mitigate some of the impacts of female genital mutilation. Interactions between survivors and health-care professionals were disproportionately framed around the law. The way in which services are planned and provided often silences the perspectives and preferences of survivors and their families. Limitations Only a minority of the interviews were conducted in a language other than English, and the recruitment of survivors was predominantly through maternity settings, which meant that some voices may not have been heard. The sample of men was relatively small, limiting interpretation. Conclusions In general, service provision remains suboptimal and can silence the perspectives and preferences of survivors. Deinfibulation services need to be widely advertised and information should highlight that the procedure will be carried out in hospital by suitable health-care professionals and that a range of time points will be offered to facilitate choice. Future services should be developed with survivors to ensure that they are clinically and culturally appropriate. Guidelines should be updated to better reflect the needs of survivors and to ensure consistency in service provision. Future work Research is needed to (1) map female genital mutilation service provision; (2) develop and test effective education to address deficits in awareness and knowledge for affected communities and health-care professionals; and (3) develop, monitor and evaluate clinically and culturally competent female genital mutilation services. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN14710507. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment Programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 27, No. 3. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Objective: To explore the views of female genital mutilation (FGM) survivors, men, and healthcare professionals (HCPs) on the timing of deinfibulation surgery and NHS service provision. Design: Qualitative study informed by the sound of silence framework. Setting: Survivors and men were recruited from three FGM prevalent areas of England. HCPs and stakeholders were from across the UK. Sample: 44 survivors, 13 men and 44 HCPs. 10 participants at two community workshops and 30 stakeholders at a national workshop. Methods: Hybrid framework analysis of 101 interviews and three workshops. Results: There was no consensus across groups on the optimal timing of deinfibulation for survivors who wished to be deinfibulated. Within group, survivors expressed a preference for deinfibulation pre-pregnancy and HCPs antenatal deinfibulation. There was no consensus for men. Participants reported that deinfibulation should take place in a hospital setting and be undertaken by a suitable HCP. Decision making around deinfibulation was complex but for those who underwent surgery it helped to mitigate FGM impacts. Whilst there were examples of good practice, in general, FGM service provision was sub-optimal. Conclusion: Deinfibulation services need to be widely advertised. Information should highlight that the procedure can be carried out at different time points, according to preference, and in a hospital by suitable HCPs. Future services should ideally be developed with survivors, to ensure that they are clinically and culturally appropriate. Guidelines would benefit from being updated to reflect the needs of survivors and to ensure consistency in provision. Study registration number ISRCTN 14710507

BackgroundWeaknesses in the provision of mental health crisis support are evident and improvements that include voluntary sector provision are promoted. There is a lack of evidence regarding the contribution of the voluntary sector and how this might be used to the best effect in mental health crisis care.AimTo investigate the contribution of voluntary sector organisations to mental health crisis care in England.DesignMultimethod sequential design with a comparative case study.SettingEngland, with four case studies in North England, East England, the Midlands and London.MethodThe method included a scoping literature review, a national survey of 1612 voluntary sector organisations, interviews with 27 national stakeholders and detailed mapping of the voluntary sector organisation provision in two regions (the north and south of England) to develop a taxonomy of voluntary sector organisations and to select four case studies. The case studies examined voluntary sector organisation crisis care provision as a system through interviews with local stakeholders (n = 73), eight focus groups with service users and carers and, at an individual level, narrative interviews with service users (n = 47) and carers (n = 12) to understand their crisis experience and service journey. There was extensive patient and public involvement in the study, including service users as co-researchers, to ensure validity. This affected the conduct of the study and the interpretation of the findings. The quality and the impact of the involvement was evaluated and commended.Main findingsA mental health crisis is considered a biographical disruption. Voluntary sector organisations can make an important contribution, characterised by a socially oriented and relational approach. Five types of relevant voluntary sector organisations were identified: (1) crisis-specific, (2) general mental health, (3) population-focused, (4) life-event-focused and (5) general social and community voluntary sector organisations. These voluntary sector organisations provide a range of support and have specific expertise. The availability and access to voluntary sector organisations varies and inequalities were evident for rural communities; black, Asian and minority ethnic communities; people who use substances; and people who identified as having a personality disorder. There was little evidence of well-developed crisis systems, with an underdeveloped approach to prevention and a lack of ongoing support.LimitationsThe survey response was low, reflecting the nature of voluntary sector organisations and demands on their time. This was a descriptive study, so evaluating outcomes from voluntary sector organisation support was beyond the scope of the study.ConclusionsThe current policy discourse frames a mental health crisis as an urgent event. Viewing a mental health crisis as a biographical disruption would better enable a wide range of contributory factors to be considered and addressed. Voluntary sector organisations have a distinctive and important role to play. The breadth of this contribution needs to be acknowledged and its role as an accessible alternative to inpatient provision prioritised.Future workA whole-system approach to mental health crisis provision is needed. The NHS, local authorities and the voluntary sector should establish how to effectively collaborate to meet the local population’s needs and to ensure the sustainability of the voluntary sector. Service users and carers from all communities need to be central to this.FundingThis project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full inHealth Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 8, No. 29. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.