Abstract
Background Several treatment modalities for heavy menstrual bleeding are available. However, many women report
being unsatisfied in their search for an appropriate and effective treatment. The aim of this study is to gain insights
in the experienced impact of heavy menstrual bleeding and the motives and considerations of women during the
decision-making process for treating heavy menstrual bleeding.
Methods
An interpretative qualitative study was performed, using in-depth interviews. In total, 14 semi-structured
interviews were conducted with patients who consulted a physician for treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding.
Participants were recruited via the Netherlands Patients Federation (N = 10) or via the outpatient clinic in the Máxima
Medical Center (N = 4). The interviews were conducted by phone or online between February 2020 and March
2021. In the interviews three topics were addressed: (1) participant’s experience with heavy menstrual bleeding, (2)
experience with patient journey of treatment decision-making and (3) elaborating on alternative treatments for heavy
menstrual bleeding. A thematic analysis was conducted.
Results
Fourteen participants aged between 30 and 59 years old were interviewed. Three main themes emerged;
“Considerations in taking the (next) step to seek help” , “Various sources of information can contribute, confuse or
frighten decision-making process” and “A physician’s understanding and a relationship of trust are needed to guide
the decision-making process” .
Conclusion
Our results show that women’s considerations and decision making strongly depend on the obtained
information and experience, the relationship with the physician, the influence of the social environment, the pre-
visit expectations/desires, the fear of treatment complications and uncertainty of the effect of the treatment. It is a
physicians role to create a trusting and open atmosphere during consultation. Patient-centered communication is
helpful to share knowledge, and gain insights into a patient’s hopes, fears and worries.
Patients’ motives and considerations
on treatment decision-making for heavy
menstrual bleeding: a qualitative study
T. J. Oderkerk1,2*, R. G. Singotani3*, L. Zuidema1,2, E. J.E. van der Hijden3, P . M.A.J. Geomini1, M. Y. Bongers1,2 and
M. H. Donker4
Page 2 of 11
Oderkerk et al. BMC Women's Health (2024) 24:439
Background
Heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) has had many defini -
tions over time, but is now defined as experiencing exces-
sive menstrual bleeding that interferes with women’s
physical, emotional, social and material quality of life.
HMB affects roughly 30% of European women in repro -
ductive age [ 1, 2]. Among women with HMB, only one
in two seeks consultation from a physician, of which 70%
receives treatment [2]. The most frequently reported rea-
son to refrain from seeking help is a lack of awareness
about the disease and its treatment options [ 2]. Addi -
tionally, HMB is often associated with social stigmas and
personal beliefs about menstruation, which can affect
women’s decisions to seek treatment [3]. However, there
are several treatment options available for managing
HMB. Usually, the first initial step in treating HMB is a
medical treatment such as the combined oral contracep -
tive (COC), tranexamic acid or inserting insertion of pro-
gesterone via an intra-uterine system. The levonorgestrel
releasing intra-uterine device (LNG-IUD) is a hormonal
contraception that has been proven effective for treat -
ing HMB as it induces atrophy of the endometrial tissue
[4, 5]. Endometrial ablation or resection (EA) is a viable
option for women who do not wish to have children, or
no longer intend to have children, as pregnancy after
EA can cause serious obstetric complications [ 6]. This
treatment aims to stop endometrial growth by ablating
the endometrial tissue and superficial myometrium [ 7].
While a hysterectomy is typically considered the most
effective treatment option, it is a major and definitive
procedure for treating HMB.
Given the various treatment options for HMB, with
each treatment having its own risks and benefits, women
may not be aware of the numerous available options [ 8,
9]. Therefore, it is crucial to collaborate with women to
explore different treatment options, respecting and pri -
oritizing their preferences. A (shared) decision-making
process involves collaboratively exploring the best avail -
able evidence with patients and supporting them in mak -
ing informed decisions that align with their values [ 10].
Patient-centered communication can help to uncover
and integrate patients’ wishes, feelings, illness beliefs,
concerns, expectations, and preferences during consul -
tation [11]. According to Zandstra et al. (2017) effective
counseling and shared decision-making are essential to
help patients navigate their options and make choices
that align with their personal values and needs [ 8]. They
specifically examined women’s preferences on the kind of
(shared) decision-making. They concluded that informa -
tion packages did not influence treatment choice, how -
ever structured interviews and computerized decision
aids, which were integrated with patient preferences,
were beneficial for treatment choice, reducing disagree -
ment, and increasing patient satisfaction [ 8]. However,
the reviewed studies did not elaborate on the specific
motives and experiences in the decision-making process
that led to the decision for a treatment choice. There -
fore, we performed this interpretative qualitative study
to gain insights in the experienced impact of HMB and
the motives and considerations of women during the
decision-making process regarding treatment options for
HMB.
Methods
Study aim and design
To gain insights in the experienced impact of HMB and
the motives and considerations of women during deci -
sion-making for different treatment options for HMB, an
interpretative qualitative study was performed, using in-
depth interviews.
Participants
Participants were recruited using purposive sampling
through the Netherlands Patients Federation (NPF) and
Máxima Medical Center (MMC). A specific question -
naire was developed to recruit members of the NPF. The
questionnaire contained information on the study aim
and questions addressing the inclusion criteria (experi -
ence with HMB; received treatment for HMB in the pre -
vious five years). Initially, only women experiencing HMB
and treated with an LNG-IUD or EA were included.
Criteria were broadened after five interviews, includ -
ing women treated with other treatments such as oral
(hormonal) medication and hysterectomy. Additional
participants who received any treatment for HMB were
recruited via MMC and they received an information
leaflet. All women that showed interest in the study, par -
ticipated in an interview. Women who never consulted a
physician for treatment of HMB were excluded.
Data collection
Semi-structured, in-depth interviews were conducted
in Dutch, between February 2020 and March 2021 and
lasted approximately 30 to 90 min. The majority of inter -
views were held during the COVID-19 pandemic and
were carried out online or by phone. All interviews were
conducted by two female researchers (RGS and TJO).
RGS was a researcher with a background of qualita -
tive research; TJO is a researcher and medical doctor in
a gynecology department. Fieldnotes were made during
the interview. A topic list was used as a guide during the
interviews (see Appendix A). The topic list was inspired
Keywords
Heavy menstrual bleeding, Qualitative study, Treatment decision-making
Page 3 of 11
Oderkerk et al. BMC Women's Health (2024) 24:439
by two models for treatment decision-making [ 10, 12,
13]. Questions were developed to reconstruct patient
journeys and gain insights on the motives and consider -
ations of participants during the decision-making process
regarding treatment options. Topics that were discussed
included: (1) participant’s experience with heavy men -
strual bleeding, (2) experience with patient journey of
treatment decision-making and (3) elaborating on alter -
native treatments for heavy menstrual bleeding. The
topic list included questions such as “What was the most
important goal you wanted to achieve when visiting your
physician?” . The process of data collection and analysis
was iterative, alternating between them. After five inter -
views, inclusion criteria were broadened and women who
received any treatment for HMB were recruited. Addi -
tionally, after five interviews an option grid was intro -
duced to discuss treatment options for HMB. This grid
explained advantages and disadvantages of various treat -
ment options for HMB offered in the Netherlands. The
option grid was sent prior to the interview. After eight
interviews, no new main themes emerged.
All interviews were audiotaped and transcribed verba -
tim. Data was collected until no new themes emerged.
Data analysis
A descriptive thematic analysis was conducted using
the revised six steps of thematic analysis as described
by Braun & Clarke (2019) [ 14]. In the first phase, the
researchers (TJO and RGS) familiarized themselves
with the data by re-reading the transcripts. In the sec -
ond phase, TJO and RGS independently fragmented and
coded the transcripts inductively. They coded the first
interviews independently and generated an initial list of
codes. Memos about contradictions or additional ques -
tions were added. The initial list of codes and memos was
discussed and if necessary, some alterations were made.
In the third phase, the codes were sorted into initial
themes. Patterns among the codes were identified by con-
stant comparison. Researcher LZ joined the analysis pro -
cess at this stage. The themes were visually represented
in a thematic map. In the fourth phase, the themes were
reviewed, discussed and revised with a senior researcher
(MHD). In the fifth phase, the themes were refined and
used as a framework for the remaining interviews. If new
patterns and themes emerged, these were added to the
existing map. MAXQDA version 2021 (VERBI Software
2021) was used to organize all data [15]. In the last phase,
narratives were written together with data extracts, and
contextualized using literature. The interviews and anal -
ysis were conducted in Dutch. Only quotations used
in the article were translated from Dutch to English by
the researchers (TJO, RGS and LZ) and checked by the
research team.
Rigor
To enhance credibility, summaries of the transcripts
were sent to the participant it concerned. Participants
were asked whether the summary was accurate, and if
they would like to clarify or rectify their responses [ 16,
17]. Participants agreed or made some changes or sug -
gestions. The topic list was reviewed by the researchers
who conducted the interviews after each interview and
the topic list was adjusted, if necessary (see Appendix
A). Baseline characteristics are provided to describe the
context of each participant (see Table 1). Lastly, to ensure
confirmability, the researchers (TJO, RGS, LZ) collabora-
tively developed themes based on the interviews. These
were then discussed with MHD (peer debriefing).
Ethical considerations
The study protocol was approved by the Medical Ethics
Review Committee of MMC. Study procedures followed
were in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki.
The study aim was explained to participants prior to the
interview. Informed consent from all participants was
obtained. Confidentiality was assured using restricted
access to the data and de-identification of the transcripts.
Interview data was stored on a secured online research
drive.
Results
Patient characteristics
Fourteen participants, aged 30–59, were interviewed. The
majority reported experiencing symptoms of HMB for
more than five years. Additionally, participants received
various treatments for their symptoms. Most participants
were treated with LNG-IUD or COC, and fewer with an
EA or a hysterectomy. See Table 1 for a complete over -
view of the participants’ baseline characteristics.
Based on analysis of the interviews, three main themes
and eleven subthemes emerged.
Theme 1: considerations in taking the (next) step to seek
help
Despite the significant impact of severe bleeding on their
daily life, participants find it difficult to seek help for
HMB. Most participants preferred a treatment without
hormones. Some participants expressed they hoped for a
natural solution, like menopause.
Impact on daily life stimulates seeking help (again)
Participants described their menstruation as heavy, illus -
trating this by examples of the amount, unexpectedness
or duration of blood loss, and the impact on their daily
lives.
“Sometimes I was bleeding for 6–7 weeks in a row
and then I wasn’t for 3 months, and then I was again
Page 4 of 11
Oderkerk et al. BMC Women's Health (2024) 24:439
for a day. I could not make any sense of it” (Partici -
pant 3).
Participants mentioned that staining and leaking from
HMB had major impact on their daily lives. Several par -
ticipants explained how heavy bleeding during the night
disrupted their sleep, requiring them to wake up every
few hours to change menstrual products. Moreover,
some participants expressed feeling ‘dirty’ , or ‘unfresh’
due to HMB.
“Judo is a full contact sport, and if you don’t feel
fresh, it is very difficult to be close to others. So that
really bothered me for a very long time” (Participant
14).
Many participants mentioned adopting precautionary
measures to manage HMB. For example, participants
used different menstrual products simultaneously, such
as a tampon and a sanitary pad. Others explained the
need to bring an extra pair of clothes to work or when
traveling outside.
“I’ve had to uh, uh, change pads and tampons every
hour, so- And then uh, I always had extra clothes
with me. So, so um, I just couldn’t do anything. I
couldn’t leave {the house}, so to speak. I couldn’t
even work anymore. Yes, I was there, but um, with
an eh, with a pack of sanitary pads and tampons in
front of me. ” (Participant 13).
Several participants were motivated to seek medical help
due to the significant impact of HMB on their daily lives.
Many participants described reaching a personal thresh -
old or experiencing a change in symptoms, leading them
to visit their GP for help.
“Even at night I had a tampon in and I had a
sanitary pad and even then, my whole bed was
destroyed. I just had to get new mattresses, because
you just leak through. And then you’re like now
something has to be done. ” (Participant 2).
Seeking help is hindered by embarrassment
Few participants found it embarrassing to go to the GP
to talk about their menstrual complaints and expose their
bodies. They found it very unpleasant to undergo vaginal
examinations, especially when they are menstruating.
This is a reason for participants to delay seeking help.
“But I always think that it is the most um, well
I really go to a doctor a lot, but um, this kind of
appointments, I find, I find it embarrassing. I don’t
know. It makes me feel uncomfortable as a woman. ”
(Participant 8).
Menopause as a solution
Other participants hoped for menopause as a natu -
ral solution. Many participants dealt with symptoms of
HMB for many years. Therefore, waiting for menopause
was considered as an alternative to the non-invasive or
surgical treatments. Some participants said that they
Table 1 Baseline characteristics of the participants (n = 14)
Age group
(years)
Nationality Highest level of
education
Duration of symp-
toms (years)
Symptoms reported Received
treatment(s)
1 40–44 Hungarian/
Dutch
University 5–10 HMB, Fatigue LNG-IUD
2 55–59 Dutch University > 15 HMB COC, LNG-IUD, EA
3 50–54 NA NA > 15 HMB, Met COC, EA, OT
4 45–49 Dutch University 5–10 HMB, Dys COC, LNG-IUD,
EA + LNG-IUD
5 55–59 Dutch HPE < 5 HMB COC, LNG-IUD
6 50–54 Dutch HPE 15 HMB, PMS, Dys, Fatigue COC, LNG-IUD
8 55–59 Dutch University 10–15 HMB, Met, Dys, PMS COC
9 35–39 Dutch SVE 5–10 HMB, PMS OT
10 30–34 Dutch SVE 5–10 HMB, Met, PMS COC, OT
11 50–54 Dutch NA 10–15 HMB, Fatigue COC
12 50–54 Dutch University > 15 HMB COC
13 50–54 Dutch University > 15 HMB COC, LNG-IUD, OT, HE
14 40–44 Dutch HPE < 5 HMB COC, OT, HE
LNG-IUD = Levonorgestrel releasing intra-uterine device, COC = Combined Oral Contraceptive, EA = Endometrial ablation, HE = Hysterectomy, OT = Other treatments
such as (contraceptive injection, Implanon, Hormone therapy, NuvaRing, Tranexamic acid), HMB = Heavy Menstrual Bleeding, Dys = dysmenorrhea, PMS = pre-
menstrual syndrome, Met = Metrorrhagia, NA = No Available data, HPE = Higher professional education, SVE = senior Secondary Vocational Education
Page 5 of 11
Oderkerk et al. BMC Women's Health (2024) 24:439
would rather wait a few more years until they reach
menopause than starting another treatment.
“I think it {a hysterectomy} is very rigorous. And
that’s a pretty big surgery, um, with the necessary-
Yes, longer recovery also um, um, yes, I’m also with
age considering- I think- I’m like, yes, suppose the
menopause is just- Yes, coming up, then it’s also
something of, then I’d rather wait for that. ” (Partici-
pant 9).
Theme 2: various sources of information can contribute,
confuse or frighten decision-making process
Different sources of information contributed to a par -
ticipant’s knowledge of different treatment options and
therefore their decision-making. These sources included
one’s own experiences, experiences or opinions of oth -
ers, online information, and information and opinions
provided by the physician. Sometimes knowledge also
caused fear or uncertainty for a particular treatment or
result.
Information provided by physicians
Information received by the participants varied enor -
mously. Some participants were well prepared for the
risks and benefits of a treatment, while others were com -
pletely overwhelmed by post-operative complications
or side effects. Most participants received a leaflet with
information about a treatment or were advised to read
information on a website provided by the gynaecologist.
“I was just given a leaflet, and it just says how the
treatment works and not what might happen after -
wards. Yes, they tell you that you could have less
blood loss and that you are going to have that nova -
sure treatment {endometrial ablation}. […]. I just
read the leaflet about how or what the treatment
itself entails. ” (Participant 3).
An option grid provides information on possible risks
and complications of all treatment options for HMB.
Many of the participants did not recognize the option
grid or were not aware of all the possible treatment
options. One participant mentioned that the use of an
option grid would be useful if she did not know all the
possible treatment options.
“So if I didn’t work in healthcare, I, I wouldn’t, I
wouldn’t know those treatments, they wouldn’t
have said anything to me, so eh- At least, an IUD
yes, but those medications without hormones and a
NovaSure treatment, that wouldn’t really have said
anything to me, I think. So I, I would like this, this
{option grid}. ” (Participant 13).
Specifically, most participants reported being unprepared
for the abdominal pain after EA.
“Well, I had a really bad stomachache 7 to 14 days
{after treatment}. When I pointed that out, they {the
physicians} said: ‘yes, that’s part of it’ . This cannot be
part of it. I believe I take 600 mg of ibuprofen, three
to four times a day. Then I thought, this is not nor -
mal. ” (Participant 2).
Social environment steers and confuses decision-making
process
In the interviewee’s social environment, diverse opinions
and experiences regarding treatments for HMB played a
role in the decision-making process. Some participants
reported negative experiences from their social environ -
ment about certain treatments. These experiences con -
tributed to a patient’s treatment decision.
“No, because I have two friends who had IUDs and
they got pregnant with twins. So that didn’t work
out either. And they weren’t yet, they did not have a
desire to have children, (…) So you always have to
weigh up what you can and can’t do and the experi-
ences of others. And that’s what you actually do it
with. ” (Participant 10).
In addition, there were numerous stories about adhesions
and pain after EA that contributed to participant’s treat -
ment decision.
“Because I read that some people did have pain
symptoms from that that {endometrium ablation}.
And that I thought, yes, always stomach pain, um,
that really held me back. ” (Participant 12).
“But that there could also be adhesions. So that was
actually for me- Anyway also from my acquaintance
where it didn’t help either, but also those adhesions
and that you then also had to go back to the gyne -
cologist continuously, that actually made me decide
a little to refrain from that. (Participant 7).
Need for self-acquired information
Another source of knowledge for participants was self-
acquired information. Many participants explained the
necessity of searching stories, experiences online and
more information about the procedures. While some
information contained negative experiences about
treatments gone wrong, there were also stories about
Page 6 of 11
Oderkerk et al. BMC Women's Health (2024) 24:439
the positive effects of treatments. However, many par -
ticipants emphasized that their primary goal to look up
information was to adequately prepare themselves.
“Certainly not because not all the stories you read
are equally positive. Hey, it’s, it’s also, there are some
horror stories, I might be too down-to-earth for that.
Of course, it depends on each person and what is
your pain threshold. And what do you think is a lot
and what kind of things do you mind? So, you have
to filter that. And there were very few positive sto -
ries, about how well things are going. So you don’t
find those either. ” (Participant 4).
One participant searched online for videos and pictures
of various treatment procedures.
Past experiences influence decision-making
One’s own previous experience with a particular treat -
ment also plays a significant role in the decision-making
process. Many participants mentioned a negative experi -
ence with the side effects of hormonal treatment. These
side effects included mental health issues (mood swings
and depression), making them reluctant to choose treat -
ments containing hormones.
Participants mentioned that taking hormones did not
feel natural. They also expressed that hormonal treat -
ments did not always reduce blood loss or premenstrual
symptoms.
“Nausea, vomiting, headaches. Yes, headache and-
Look, swollen breasts and belly you always have.
But it was like when I took the pill that it got much
worse. ” (Participant 7).
However, other participants had good experiences with
hormones (COC or LNG-IUD), which made them feel
positive about those treatments and ultimately made the
choice of treatment easy. One participant mentioned
when discussing the endometrial ablation and the endo -
metrial ablation combined with the LNG-IUD, that she
would prefer the latter option based on previous experi -
ences with the LNG-IUD.
Expectations and fears prior to treatment steer the decision
While some participants considered treatment as a solu -
tion to their complaints, others perceived it as an obsta -
cle. Participants mentioned fear of complications or
worsening of the symptoms as a consideration to reject a
specific treatment.
“I mean, if you go for a treatment, then, of course you
want your problem to be solved in the end, but also
you don’t want a new problem to arise. Or another
problem or, or the same problem in, in- Yes, that,
you don’t want that. You want your problem to be
solved in the end. ” (Participant 9).
The potential side effects of treatment on their daily life
were also a consideration. For example, abdominal pain
after undergoing an EA and an inability to continue
with daily activities were considered as disadvantages of
EA. Other participants did not prefer a hysterectomy.
This treatment was seen as invasive and painful, and it
required an extended recovery time.
“Um, well the pain um, I was um, very afraid of it
anyway. And I had heard stories about other people
who had been in a lot of pain. So I was, I thought,
very exciting. And the period afterwards of eh, I’m
quite a busy bee. And then the six weeks of doing
nothing and, eh, basically not being allowed to lift
a carton of milk, I really dreaded that. ” (Participant
14).
Participants who underwent a hysterectomy expressed
that taking a short break from daily activities due to the
surgical procedure was perceived as a minor setback
opposed to the disadvantages of HMB. For example, the
following participant already underwent three treatments
before a hysterectomy and she described her decision
leading to the hysterectomy as a tough journey:
“Um, so those advantages did far outweigh the dis -
advantages for me. The disadvantages are that you
just have a long recovery, it’s quite an operation and
I was a bit worried about that. But um, it’s also been
a tough journey in the end, because it was a tough
ok, but um, yes, it’s the best decision I could have
made, I think. ” (Participant 13).
At first this participant was disappointed with what she
could do during recovery, but when she was fully recov -
ered, she was satisfied with the end result.
“During recovery um, yes, at the time I was disap -
pointed with what I could actually do, so to speak.
I couldn’t do anything. Um, and I really had to take
a lot of rest and when I was fully recovered, yes, that
was absolutely super, no more trouble from anything
and eh, yes, ideal. I should have done that much ear-
lier. ” (Participant 13).
The majority of the participants suffered from HMB
for several years and expressed the desire for a mild or
regular menstruation, or no menstruation at all. They
emphasized that the burden of their symptoms affected
their daily lives. Anticipated treatment effects such as
Page 7 of 11
Oderkerk et al. BMC Women's Health (2024) 24:439
reduced blood loss and increased control over their lives
were mentioned as factors influencing their treatment
decisions.
When asking their initial preferences for treatment,
some participants indicated they preferred the least inva -
sive treatment, such as hormonal contraception. One
participant mentioned preferring an LNG-IUD opposed
to COC, since it does not require taking a pill every day.
“I don’t want to deal with it. I just want Mirena in
and be done. Hopefully then it will be inserted prop -
erly. And they’re just going to monitor it really well
this time, every so often they’re going to check to see if
it’s still in place. So you know, then you don’t have to
worry about it anymore” . (Participant 7)
In contrast, some participants considered hormonal con -
traception (taking a pill daily) as a simple treatment.
Many participants favored a hysterectomy, viewing it
as a definitive solution. They mentioned benefits such as
‘getting rid of all the symptoms’ or no more blood loss.
Some of the participants had no desire for additional
children and considered their uterus as unnecessary. One
participant mentioned that if a hysterectomy would elim-
inate premenstrual symptoms, she would prefer that.
“Coming from me, I would have said: take out the
whole uterus and be done with it. I would have said
the same thing 10 years ago, gee, I don’t mind if it’s
taken out. “ (Participant 3).
Theme 3: A physician’s understanding and a relationship of
trust are needed to guide the decision-making process
A physician’s attitude, the feeling of being heard and
room to express one’s own choice during the decision-
making process affected the experience of the partici -
pants. Most participants highly valued the opinion of
their physician and some followed their advice.
The importance of the feeling of being heard
Participants emphasized the importance of the relation -
ship with their treating physician in their decision-mak -
ing. To them, being heard and taken seriously during
consultation was important for their appraisal of the
relationship.
“When the internist took me seriously about the ane-
mia, that really made me feel supported. Because
earlier, I have also been to an internist and they were
like, yeah, well, it’s part of it, end of story. ” (Partici-
pant 12).
Although some participants were appreciative of the
relationship, others did not feel heard by their physi -
cian. Some participants mentioned that the physician
did not notice their symptoms of HMB at first. Others
mentioned that their physician did not take their pain
seriously, which made some participants feel like their
complaints were “trivial” . All these factors led to a feeling
of not being heard by a physician.
“Well, I think I had a really bad stomachache 7 to
14 days {after treatment}. And if you indicate that
and they {physician} say: ‘yes, that’s part of it’ . Then I
think: this is not part of it, I believe I took ibuprofen
600 mg and then three to four a day. Then I think:
I don’t think this is normal. There was something
wrong with that. Well, that was not picked up. I
regret that. ” (Participant 2).
Room for expressing one’s own choice next to the physician’s
opinion is important
Participants mentioned the importance of expressing
one’s own treatment preference. They expressed that an
open relationship with their physician made it easier to
express their wishes. Participants expressed that they
appreciated being given the time to consider different
treatments and make a shared decision. In contrast, in a
relationship in which a physician is very directive, little
space is left for a patient’s own choice.
“Well, I actually wanted to go for Novasure {endo -
metrial ablation} then, but then they thought I was
too young for that. Then I was about forty and then
they thought I was too young for that, while, I knew
myself that I had no desire to have children, eh, I
had no partner at that time” (Participant 11).
Participants often expressed that their treating physi -
cian strongly suggested which treatment the participant
should undergo. Consequently, not all treatment options
were presented to the patient. In particular, the option to
perform a hysterectomy was often not discussed or was
very quickly discarded for various reasons.
“Yes, too young and all that, and we can always
try other treatments. I say, yes other treatments, I
don’t see the point. If someone suffers so much, and
not just for a moment but for a number of years. I
don’t want to have children, never have and never
will. And it’s the patient’s wish, “Oh, I don’t mind
having my uterus removed. I don’t see the point in
it not being allowed or being possible” . Because then
I think, as a patient, I am actually being hindered in
my choice, because they have already made a choice
Page 8 of 11
Oderkerk et al. BMC Women's Health (2024) 24:439
for me not to do it. While they do mention it as an
option to be able to do it, ultimately” . (Participant 3)
Trusting the physician matters
Participants also mentioned that trust in the relationship
with the physician is key. Some participants fully trusted
their physicians and let them decide.
“No, I didn’t have eh, no I didn’t have myself oh, I
think, if I go to the gynecologist, he must know what
is best […] And burning {ablation} thought my gyne -
cologist, he’s not in favor of that. So that was already
measuring with him of we’re not going to start that,
because I don’t like it, because that’s more um, caus-
ing problems than it is solving. That was his own
opinion, so I think, then I follow his opinion. ” (Par -
ticipant 10).
Nevertheless, other participants mentioned distrusting
their physician or their competence. Reasons to distrust a
physician included: inattentiveness to symptoms, rumors
about specific physicians, or instances where a general
practitioner (GP) refused to refer a patient to a gyne -
cologist. For some participants, this resulted in avoiding
appointments with their physician.
“Well, he checked, but yes, he thought I was squea -
mish. Well, okay. Yes, sorry, but the treatment itself,
I found, compared to the pain after. So, just to put it
in perspective. So in your eyes I might be squeamish,
but yes, you don’t know the background, I think at
that moment. […] If I had known that he was the
gynecologist on duty, I would not have gone. I say
very honestly, in retrospect. Because I heard several
stories about him” . (Participant 4)
Discussion
The aim of this study was to gain insights in the experi -
enced impact of HMB and the motives and consider -
ations of women during the decision-making process
regarding treatment options for HMB. The three main
themes that emerged are “Considerations in taking the
(next) step to seek help” (Theme 1), “Various sources of
information can contribute, confuse or frighten decision-
making process” (Theme 2) and “ A physician’s under -
standing and a relationship of trust are needed to guide
the decision-making process” (Theme 3).
The burden of HMB on daily life was an important rea-
son to seek for help, but differed enormously between
the participants. This is in agreement with Chapple et
al. (1999) who found that symptoms which “started to
disrupt their lives were commonly the trigger to seek
medical help and differ between women” [ 18]. The pro -
cess of seeking help consists of different steps. Initially,
the perception of menstrual bleeding as ‘abnormal’ must
be acknowledged, followed by the decision to determine
the legitimacy of seeking medical help. The interviews
revealed that some participants had a negative connota -
tion towards hormone-containing treatments, mainly
due to the perception of administered hormones not
being natural. The study of van den Brink et al. confirms
this finding, as further explained below [19].
Women’s knowledge about the different treatment
options comes from a variety of sources, such as the
internet, their own experiences, others’ experiences
and opinions, and the opinions of their physicians. In
the study of Vuorma et al. (2003), approximately one in
three women (17–34%) felt like they were not sufficiently
informed by the physicians on the benefits and compli -
cations of alternative treatment options for HMB. Prefer-
ences regarding treatment were most strongly associated
with women’s pre-visit preferences [ 20, 21]. Many par -
ticipants considered treatment for HMB as an obstacle,
as they feared side effects, complications and disruption
of daily life. Participants were also afraid that treatment
would not provide a definite solution or might worsen
their symptoms. Therefore, many participants favored
the least invasive treatment. This finding is also in line
with the results of van den Brink et al. (2018) [ 19]. They
studied women’s preferences for treatment of HMB and
concluded that the presence of hormones, the (ire)revers-
ibility of treatment and effect on irregular bleeding were
important in making a treatment decision. In our study,
participants mentioned the presence of hormones as a
factor influencing their decision to not choose a spe -
cific treatment. Nevertheless, the study of van Den Brink
does not elaborate on the specific motivations of women
during the decision-making process. However, it is
important to note that participants differed in their pref -
erences. While some participants preferred non-invasive
treatments, others favored a hysterectomy, as it offers a
definite solution for their complaints.
The experienced relationship with a physician played a
major role in the participant’s treatment decision-mak -
ing. Participants expressed that the feeling of being heard,
trust in the physician and being able to express one’s own
choice were important in the appreciation of the relation-
ship. Experiences of participants varied, some valued the
relationship with their physician, while others felt dis -
trust towards their physician. The opinion of physicians
seems to dominate the decision-making process. Eising
et al. (2018) explored key factors for successful support
in patients with Von Willebrand disease, faced with HMB
[22]. Their research found that a precondition for support
is a good relationship with a physician: a trusting rela -
tionship, where information can be shared. The findings
Page 9 of 11
Oderkerk et al. BMC Women's Health (2024) 24:439
in this study are in line with findings from Eising et al.
(2018). According to the research of Skea (2004), 75% of
the women who underwent a hysterectomy for HMB pre-
ferred to make the decision together with their physician
[23]. 4% of women preferred the physician to make the
decision, while 2% wished to make their own decision.
The desired outcome of the treatment varied among
participants, ranging from achieving a mild menstrua -
tion through a simple treatment to seeking a definitive
solution by undergoing an invasive treatment such as a
hysterectomy. The participants had varying expectations
regarding the treatment, including considerations of its
invasiveness or effectiveness. These expectations steered
the final treatment decision. Kennedy et al. (2003) con -
ducted a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the
effect of structured preference elicitation interviews
during the decision-making process for treatment of
HMB [ 24]. The first group received a video explaining
the different treatment options, while the second group
also met with a research nurse to discuss different treat -
ment options. Concluding, women who got a chance to
elaborate their preferences, underwent second invasive
treatment (hysterectomy) less often after two years of
follow-up. Also, satisfaction rates were higher and health
care costs were lower in the group of women who were
seen by the research nurse. This is in line with the results
of our study. This highlights the importance of under -
standing woman’s motivations and considerations when
deciding on a treatment.
A helpful tool to counsel the advantages and disadvan -
tages of the various treatment options in the consulting
room is the use of an option grid, commonly used in the
Netherlands. This grid briefly explains the success rates
of the various HMB treatments as mentioned above,
as well as the benefits and complications. In this study,
we sent an option grid prior to the interview, which we
used as an overview of the possible treatments offered in
the Netherlands. We did not study the usefulness of the
option grid, but we asked if the participants recognized
the grid. More important, we asked if they recognized all
the treatment options. It was noticeable that most partic-
ipants were not aware of all the treatment options avail -
able for HMB. A helpful way to explain all the treatment
options during consultation is to use an option grid.
Strengths and limitations
A strength of this study is that by using in-depth inter -
view methods we were able to foster a safe environment
to gain the participants’ trust to share their experiences.
Another strength of this study is that we interviewed
women who had experienced HMB multiple years and
were therefore at different stages of the disease with a
variety of treatment experiences. We aimed to ensure
transferability by providing baseline characteristics of
each participant. Additionally, the topic list was dis -
cussed by two researchers after each interview and
adapted after five interviews. To ensure dependability,
we collected data until no new themes emerged. After
eight interviews, no new main themes emerged. In addi -
tion, we analyzed the data iteratively and we refined the
themes if necessary. Finally, to ensure credibility, partici -
pants received a summary of the results and were asked
feedback on the interpretation of the results. All partici -
pants responded and seven participants did not suggest
any changes or clarifications.
Our study was limited to the experiences and consid -
erations of women who received treatment of HMB.
Experiences of women who have never sought medi -
cal consultation or consulted a physician but refrained
from treatment were not included. Since we recruited
participants through questionnaires and flyers, it is pos -
sible that self-selection bias occurred. It is possible that
we only interviewed participants who were comfortable
with sharing their stories, leading to a bias in the data
[25]. It is also possible that the members of the Nether -
lands Patients Federation who participated in this study
were more assertive than the average patient. Amongst
the participants, there is diversity in terms of age, edu -
cation level, years of experience with HMB and type
of treatment. Unfortunately, there is little variation in
nationality. As a result, topics such as culture and religion
and whether these factors play a role in considerations
for treatments are not included. The data was retrospec -
tively collected, which may have increased the possibil -
ity of recall bias. Women who consulted a physician five
years prior to the interview were eligible for our study.
Recall bias was minimized by recruiting women through
the patient clinic of MMC who were in the midst of their
treatment. Motives and considerations regarding the
received treatment may be influenced by the effective -
ness of the received treatment, the moment in the patient
journey and previous experiences of treatments for HMB.
Also, the interviews were conducted by two researchers,
of which one is a medical doctor. This may have impacted
openness of the interviewee due to perceived formality.
In addition, the doctor’s presence may have introduced
response bias. To address this, we implemented rapport
building and engaged in reflexive practices. Lastly, the
interviews were conducted in Dutch therefore the quotes
were translated into English by the research team. As a
result, the emotion of the quotes could get lost in the
translation.
Recommendations Our results suggest that a patient’s
treatment decision is influenced by the attitude and com-
munication of their physician. The findings of this study
allow for the formulation of a few recommendations.
Most significantly, it is critical to foster an environment
of open communication during consultation so that the
Page 10 of 11
Oderkerk et al. BMC Women's Health (2024) 24:439
patient feels at ease with the physician. Patient-centered
communication is a helpful communication tool to use
during consultation [ 11]. It acknowledges the entire per -
son, their personality, life history, and social structure in
order to develop a shared understanding of the problem,
treatment goals, and barriers to those goals. This allows
us to gain an understanding of the motivations for a cer -
tain belief, experience, or knowledge from the perspec -
tive of women. It is also important to consider that shame
and discomfort may play a role in the decision to consult
a physician.
Participants of this study particularly valued being
informed about all possible treatment options for HMB,
including the advantages and disadvantages of each treat-
ment. The option grid can be a helpful tool to use during
the decision-making process.
In future research, we recommend a prospective study
with a long follow-up, following women from the onset
of their patient journey to investigate all possible factors
influencing treatment decisions.
Conclusion
This study provides insights into patients’ motives and
considerations during decision-making for treatments of
HMB, but also in the long and confusing journey some
participants experienced. The first obstacle to overcome
for women with HMB is to decide that help is needed
(again). Main considerations in the decision-making
process include obtained information and experience,
relationship with the physician, influence of the social
environment, pre-visit expectations/desires, fear of treat -
ment complications and uncertainty of treatment effect.
It is the responsibility of the physician to create a trusting
and open atmosphere during consultation. Patient-cen -
tered communication is helpful to share knowledge, and
gain insight into patients’ hopes, fears and worries. Addi-
tionally, it is essential to offer the patient comprehensive
information to support informed decision-making.
Abbreviations
HMB Heavy menstrual bleeding
LNG-IUD Levonorgestrel-releasing intra-uterine device
EA Endometrial ablation
NPF Netherlands Patient Federation (Dutch patient
federation). See also: https://www.patientenfederatie.nl/
netherlands-patients-federation
COC Combined oral contraceptive
Acknowledgements
The researchers thank all the participating women in this study.
Author contributions
All authors took part in designing the study. TJO and RGS conducted the
interviews and transcribed the audio recordings to text. TJO and RGS
performed the initial analysis and identified and organized the meaning
units into codes and preliminary groups of themes. TJO, RGS, LZ and MHD
participated in developing a final structure for the themes and subthemes.
TJO, RGS and LZ made a first draft of the article. TJO, RGS and LZ finalized the
manuscript in cooperation with PMAJG, EJEH, MYB and MHD. All authors read
and approved the final manuscript.
Funding
No funding.
Data availability
The datasets used and analysed during the current study are available from
the corresponding author on reasonable request.
Declarations
Ethics approval and consent to participate
The study protocol was approved by the Medical Ethics Review Committee
of Máxima MC corresponding number N20.025 / L20.027. The study aim
was explained to participants prior to the interview. Informed consent of all
participants was obtained. Study procedures followed were in accordance
with the Declaration of Helsinki.
Consent for publication
Not applicable.
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Author details
1Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Máxima Medical Center, P .O.
Box: 7777, Veldhoven MB 5500, The Netherlands
2Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology MUMC+, Grow-School
of Oncology and Reproduction Maastricht University, Maastricht, The
Netherlands
3Department of Ethics, Governance, and Society, School of Business and
Economics, VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
4Department of Health Sciences, VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam,
the Netherlands
Received: 7 May 2024 / Accepted: 17 July 2024
References
1. Practice. bulletin no. 128: diagnosis of abnormal uterine bleeding in
reproductive-aged women. Obstetrics and gynecology. 2012;120(1):197–206.
2. Fraser IS, Mansour D, Breymann C, Hoffman C, Mezzacasa A, Petraglia F.
Prevalence of heavy menstrual bleeding and experiences of affected women
in a European patient survey. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2015;128(3):196–200.
3. Kamaludin SAN, Zhang XR, Shorey S. Perspectives of women expe-
riencing Menorrhagia: a descriptive qualitative study. J Clin Nurs.
2019;28(13–14):2659–68.
4. Lethaby A, Hussain M, Rishworth JR, Rees MC. Progesterone or progestogen-
releasing intrauterine systems for heavy menstrual bleeding. Cochrane
Database Syst Rev. 2015(4):Cd002126.
5. Beelen P , van den Brink MJ, Herman MC, Geomini P , Dekker JH, Duijnhoven
RG, et al. Levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system versus endometrial
ablation for heavy menstrual bleeding. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2021;224(2):187.
e1-.e10.
6. Kohn JR, Shamshirsaz AA, Popek E, Guan X, Belfort MA, Fox KA. Pregnancy
after endometrial ablation: a systematic review. BJOG: Int J Obstet Gynecol.
2018;125(1):43–53.
7. Munro MG. Endometrial ablation. Best practice & research Clinical obstetrics
& gynaecology. 2018;46:120 – 39.
8. Zandstra D, Busser JAS, Aarts JWM, Nieboer TE. Interventions to support
shared decision-making for women with heavy menstrual bleeding: a sys-
tematic review. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2017;211:156–63.
9. Aarts JWM, Thompson R, Alam SS, Dannenberg M, Elwyn G, Foster TC.
Encounter decision aids to facilitate shared decision-making with women
experiencing heavy menstrual bleeding or symptomatic uterine fibroids: a
before-after study. Patient Educ Couns. 2021;104(9):2259–65.
Page 11 of 11
Oderkerk et al. BMC Women's Health (2024) 24:439
10. Elwyn G, Lloyd A, May C, van der Weijden T, Stiggelbout A, Edwards A, et
al. Collaborative deliberation: a model for patient care. Patient Educ Couns.
2014;97(2):158–64.
11. Swenson SL, Buell S, Zettler P , White M, Ruston DC, Lo B. Patient-cen-
tered communication: do patients really prefer it? J Gen Intern Med.
2004;19(11):1069–79.
12. OECD Directorate for Science, Technology and Innovation. 2014 [https://
www.oecd.org/sti/inno/What-is-impact-assessment-OECDImpact.pdf ].
13. Entwistle VA, Watt IS. Patient involvement in treatment decision-making:
the case for a broader conceptual framework. Patient Educ Couns.
2006;63(3):268–78.
14. Braun V, Clarke V. Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Res
Sport Exerc Health. 2019;11(4):589–97.
15. Software VMAXQDA. 2022 Berlin, Germany: VERBI Software; 2021.
16. Ahmed S. The pillars of trustworthiness in qualitative research. 2024.
17. Ponterotto JG. Brief note on the origins, evolution, and meaning of the quali-
tative research concept thick description. Qualitative Rep. 2006;11(3):538–49.
18. Chapple A. Menorrhagia: women’s perceptions of this condition and its treat-
ment. J Adv Nurs. 1999;29(6):1500–6.
19. van den Brink MJ, Beelen P , Herman MC, Claassen NJJ, Bongers MY, Geomini
PM, et al. Women’s preferences for the levonorgestrel intrauterine system ver-
sus endometrial ablation for heavy menstrual bleeding. Eur J Obstet Gynecol
Reprod Biol. 2018;228:143–7.
20. Vuorma S, Rissanen P , Aalto AM, Kujansuu E, Hurskainen R, Teperi J. Factors
predicting choice of treatment for menorrhagia in gynaecology outpatient
clinics. Soc Sci Med. 2003;56(8):1653–60.
21. Vuorma S, Teperi J, Hurskainen R, Aalto AM, Rissanen P , Kujansuu E. Correlates
of women’s preferences for treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding. Patient
Educ Couns. 2003;49(2):125–32.
22. Eising HP , Sanders YV, de Meris J, Leebeek FWG, Meijer K. Women pre-
fer proactive support from providers for treatment of heavy menstrual
bleeding: a qualitative study in adult women with moderate or severe Von
Willebrand disease. Haemophilia: Official J World Federation Hemophilia.
2018;24(6):950–6.
23. Skea Z, Harry V, Bhattacharya S, Entwistle V, Williams B, MacLennan G, et al.
Women’s perceptions of decision-making about hysterectomy. BJOG: Int J
Obstet Gynecol. 2004;111(2):133–42.
24. Kennedy AD, Sculpher MJ, Coulter A, Dwyer N, Rees M, Horsley S, et al. A
multicentre randomised controlled trial assessing the costs and benefits of
using structured information and analysis of women’s preferences in the
management of menorrhagia. Health Technol Assess (Winchester Eng).
2003;7(8):1–76.
25. Robinson OC. Sampling in interview-based qualitative research: a theoretical
and practical guide. Qualitative Res Psychol. 2014;11(1):25–41.
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affiliations.
Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below.
Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure
cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can
have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy
(via DOI)
is the canonical version.