Experiences of Care and Gaslighting in Patients With Vulvovaginal Disorders
- PMID: 40338544
- PMCID: PMC12062909
- DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.9486
Experiences of Care and Gaslighting in Patients With Vulvovaginal Disorders
Abstract
Importance: Medical gaslighting, in which a patient's concerns are dismissed without proper evaluation, has been described anecdotally in vulvovaginal patient care, but has not been quantified.
Objective: To use a patient-centered instrument to measure adverse experiences in vulvovaginal care.
Design, setting, and participants: Common themes from National Vulvodynia Association patient testimonials were used to design a mixed-methods measure of patient experience that included both quantitative and qualitative questions. An instrument was created and submitted to officers from the National Vulvodynia Association and Tight-Lipped, another patient advocacy organization, for feedback. The measure was then completed by patients before their first appointment at a vulvovaginal disorder referral clinic from August 2023 to February 2024.
Exposure: Participation in the survey.
Main outcomes and measures: The primary outcome was the incidence of reported clinician behavior and consequent distress as reported on the survey instrument. Quantitative data were analyzed using simple descriptive statistics (mean [SD], median [IQR], and percentage). Narrative responses provided by patients were analyzed using the clinical-qualitative method for content analysis.
Results: A total of 520 patients completed surveys; 5 were eliminated because the patient was younger than 18 years, 6 were eliminated for duplication, 6 were eliminated because they had no past clinician, and 56 were eliminated for completely blank responses. Thus, surveys of 447 patients (mean [SD] age, 41.7 [15.2] years) were analyzed (86% response rate). Patients had a mean (SD) of 5.50 (4.53) past clinicians. Patients reported that a mean (SD) of 43.5% (33.9%) of past practitioners were supportive, 26.6% (31.7%) were belittling, and 20.5% (30.9%) did not believe the patient. In total, 186 patients (41.6%) were told they just needed to relax more, 92 (20.6%) were recommended to drink alcohol, 236 (52.8%) considered ceasing care because their concerns were not addressed, 92 (20.6%) were referred to psychiatry without medical treatment, 72 (16.8%) felt unsafe during a medical encounter, and 176 (39.4%) said they were made to feel crazy, the most distressing surveyed behavior (rated at a mean [SD] of 7.39 [3.06] of 10 on a numerical rating scale of distress). A total of 1150 quotations were analyzed qualitatively; common themes included lack of clinician knowledge (247 quotations) and dismissive behaviors (211 quotations).
Conclusions and relevance: In this cross-sectional study, a patient-centered measure of adverse experiences in vulvovaginal care was developed. Participants reported common past experiences with gaslighting and substantial distress; they frequently considered ceasing care. There is an urgent need for education supporting a biopsychosocial, trauma-informed approach to vulvovaginal pain and continued development of validated instruments to quantify patient experiences.
Conflict of interest statement
References
-
- Fricker M. Epistemic Injustice: Power and the Ethics of Knowing. Oxford University Press; 2010.
-
- Abramson K. Turning up the lights on gaslighting. Philos Perspect. 2014;28:1-30. doi:10.1111/phpe.12046 - DOI
-
- Sweet PL. The sociology of gaslighting. Am Sociol Rev. 2019;84(5):851-875. doi:10.1177/0003122419874843 - DOI
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Molecular Biology Databases
Miscellaneous
