An analysis of the content and clinical implications of online advertisements for female genital cosmetic surgery
- PMID: 23171607
- PMCID: PMC3533050
- DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001908
An analysis of the content and clinical implications of online advertisements for female genital cosmetic surgery
Abstract
Objectives: Women who are contemplating any form of female genital cosmetic surgery (FGCS) are likely to seek information from provider websites. The aim of this study is to examine the breadth, depth and quality of clinical information communicated to women on 10 popular sites and to discuss the implications of the results.
Methods: The content of online advertisement from 10 private providers that offer FGCS procedures was examined according to 16 information categories relating to indications for surgery, types of procedure, risks and benefits.
Results: FGCS procedures were presented on all of the provider websites as an effective treatment for genital appearance concerns. No explanation for presenting clinical complaints was found. There was scanty reference to appearance diversity. Only minimal scientific information on outcomes or risks could be identified. There was no mention of potential alternative ways for managing appearance concerns or body dissatisfaction.
Conclusions: The quality and quantity of clinical information in FGCS provider sites is poor, with erroneous information in some instances. Impeccable professionalism and ethical integrity is crucial for this controversial practice. Clear and detailed guidelines on how to raise the standard of information to women on all aspects of FGCS are urgently needed.
Similar articles
-
Pathologising diversity: medical websites offering female genital cosmetic surgery in Australia.Cult Health Sex. 2020 Jan;22(1):64-80. doi: 10.1080/13691058.2019.1574029. Epub 2019 Feb 22. Cult Health Sex. 2020. PMID: 30794088
-
Women's Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practice About Female Genital Cosmetic Surgery: A Cross-Sectional Study in Saudi Arabia.Cureus. 2023 Nov 21;15(11):e49201. doi: 10.7759/cureus.49201. eCollection 2023 Nov. Cureus. 2023. PMID: 38143609 Free PMC article.
-
'Botched labiaplasty': a content analysis of online advertising for revision labiaplasty.J Obstet Gynaecol. 2020 Oct;40(7):1000-1005. doi: 10.1080/01443615.2019.1679732. Epub 2019 Dec 12. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2020. PMID: 31826680
-
Measuring Quality of Life in Female Genital Cosmetic Procedure Patients: A Systematic Review of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures.Aesthet Surg J. 2020 Feb 17;40(3):311-318. doi: 10.1093/asj/sjz325. Aesthet Surg J. 2020. PMID: 31720690
-
Contemporary cosmetic surgery: the potential risks and relevance for practice.J Clin Nurs. 2011 Jul;20(13-14):1801-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2010.03527.x. Epub 2010 Oct 15. J Clin Nurs. 2011. PMID: 20946543 Review.
Cited by
-
Female genital cosmetic surgery: a cross-sectional survey exploring knowledge, attitude and practice of general practitioners.BMJ Open. 2016 Sep 26;6(9):e013010. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013010. BMJ Open. 2016. PMID: 27678547 Free PMC article.
-
"All you Gain is Pain and Sorrow": Facilitators and Barriers to the Prevention of Female Genital Mutilation in High-income Countries.Trauma Violence Abuse. 2024 Oct;25(4):2891-2906. doi: 10.1177/15248380241229744. Epub 2024 Feb 16. Trauma Violence Abuse. 2024. PMID: 38362801 Free PMC article.
-
The contribution of online content to the promotion and normalisation of female genital cosmetic surgery: a systematic review of the literature.BMC Womens Health. 2015 Nov 25;15:110. doi: 10.1186/s12905-015-0271-5. BMC Womens Health. 2015. PMID: 26608568 Free PMC article.
-
In their own words: a qualitative content analysis of women's and men's preferences for women's genitals.Sex Educ. 2015 Jul 1;15(4):421-436. doi: 10.1080/14681811.2015.1031884. Epub 2015 May 21. Sex Educ. 2015. PMID: 27004044 Free PMC article.
-
Vaginal rejuvenation: current perspectives.Int J Womens Health. 2017 Jul 21;9:513-519. doi: 10.2147/IJWH.S99700. eCollection 2017. Int J Womens Health. 2017. PMID: 28860864 Free PMC article. Review.
References
-
- American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Committee Opinion No. 378: vaginal ‘rejuvenation’ and cosmetic vaginal procedures. Obstet Gynecol 2007;110:737. - PubMed
-
- Liao LM, Michala L, Creighton SM. Labial surgery for well women: a review of the literature. BJOG 117:20–5 - PubMed
-
- Tiefer L. Female cosmetic genital surgery: freakish or inevitable. Analysis from medical marketing, bioethics and feminist theory. Feminism Psychol 2008;18:466–79
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources