Perspectives and Priorities for Endometriosis Multidisciplinary Team Care in Australia: A Qualitative Mixed-Methods Study Involving Patients, Caregivers and Health Professionals

Pinar Cingiloglu, Pirotta S, Stephanie Pirotta, Beauchamp A, Annette Beauchamp, Georgina Bell, Bell G, Nikki Campbell, Campbell N, Chan K, Karyn Chan, Laura Chapman, Chapman L, Christelis N, Nick Christelis, Morrison S, Shan Morrison, Rebelo Da Gama RP, Rafaella Pires Rebelo Da Gama, Readman E, Emma Readman, Mooney SS, Samantha S Mooney, Sarah J Holdsworth-Carson, Holdsworth-Carson SJ, Kate Tyson, Tyson K
The Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology · 2026 · vol. 66(1) , pp. e70088 · doi:10.1111/ajo.70088 · PMID:41423844
other OA: closed public-domain-us
Full text JSON View on PubMed View at publisher
⚙ AI-generated summary by gemini-2.5-flash-lite, 2026-06-09 ⓘ

This study explored Australian patient and health professional perspectives on multidisciplinary care for endometriosis, identifying key priorities for clinic environments, staffing, holistic support, and financial accessibility.

One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works

⚙ AI-generated deep summary by claude@2026-06, 2026-06-10 · read from full text ⓘ

This mixed-methods qualitative study examined patient/carer and healthcare professional perspectives on multidisciplinary team (MDT) care models for endometriosis and pelvic pain in Australia, using surveys co-designed with a 14-member advisory group, thematic analysis, and consensus development via focus groups. The authors collected views from 24 patients/carers and 29 healthcare professionals and identified six recommendation themes: clinic environment preferences, staff interactions, holistic support, financial accessibility, and resource needs, with both groups emphasizing empathetic, experienced clinicians, up-to-date evidence-based information, and personalized care plans. A major limitation noted is that data are not publicly available due to privacy and ethical restrictions, and the results are based on participants’ expressed perspectives rather than objectively measured clinical outcomes. This paper is centrally about endometriosis—focusing on stakeholder-defined priorities for establishing and improving endometriosis MDT clinics in Australia.

Read from the paper's body, not the abstract. Not a substitute for reading the paper. No clinical advice. How this works

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Endometriosis is a chronic condition affecting 1 in 7 women, girls, and gender-diverse individuals in Australia. It significantly impacts daily life, causing pain, psychological distress and productivity loss. Multidisciplinary team (MDT) care is fundamental for managing chronic pain in endometriosis. Nevertheless, limited studies have explored perspectives on MDT care in the Australian context, and there remains a lack of consensus on what a MDT care model should include and how improved continuity of care can be achieved. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate patient and health professional perspectives on MDT care models for endometriosis and pelvic pain, and to inform decisions about establishing future MDT clinics in Australia. METHODS: A mixed-methods study was co-designed involving an advisory group of 14 members. Surveys capturing quantitative and qualitative data were disseminated to patients/carers and healthcare professionals. Thematic analysis was performed on qualitative data, and consensus statements were developed and refined through focus groups. RESULTS: Participants included 29 healthcare professionals and 24 patients/carers. Recommendations were voiced under six key themes: preferences for clinic environments, staff interactions, holistic support, financial accessibility and resource needs. Patients valued empathetic, experienced clinicians and preferred both options for face-to-face and telehealth interactions. Financial strain was a significant concern, highlighting the need for affordable care. Both groups stressed the importance of up-to-date, evidence-based information and personalised care plans. CONCLUSION: This study underscores the need for person-centred, holistic and accessible MDT clinics for endometriosis in Australia. The consensus statements provide a blueprint for developing such clinics. Implementing these recommendations can enhance endometriosis care quality, improving patient experiences and outcomes. This provides the first steps to better understanding the wants and needs of both patients, carers and HCP in setting up future services as well as modifying existing services.
Full text 2,622 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · 5 sections · click to expand

Abstract

Background Endometriosis is a chronic condition affecting 1 in 7 women, girls, and gender-diverse individuals in Australia. It significantly impacts daily life, causing pain, psychological distress and productivity loss. Multidisciplinary team (MDT) care is fundamental for managing chronic pain in endometriosis. Nevertheless, limited studies have explored perspectives on MDT care in the Australian context, and there remains a lack of consensus on what a MDT care model should include and how improved continuity of care can be achieved.

Objective

This study aims to evaluate patient and health professional perspectives on MDT care models for endometriosis and pelvic pain, and to inform decisions about establishing future MDT clinics in Australia.

Methods

A mixed-methods study was co-designed involving an advisory group of 14 members. Surveys capturing quantitative and qualitative data were disseminated to patients/carers and healthcare professionals. Thematic analysis was performed on qualitative data, and consensus statements were developed and refined through focus groups.

Results

Participants included 29 healthcare professionals and 24 patients/carers. Recommendations were voiced under six key themes: preferences for clinic environments, staff interactions, holistic support, financial accessibility and resource needs. Patients valued empathetic, experienced clinicians and preferred both options for face-to-face and telehealth interactions. Financial strain was a significant concern, highlighting the need for affordable care. Both groups stressed the importance of up-to-date, evidence-based information and personalised care plans.

Conclusion

This study underscores the need for person-centred, holistic and accessible MDT clinics for endometriosis in Australia. The consensus statements provide a blueprint for developing such clinics. Implementing these recommendations can enhance endometriosis care quality, improving patient experiences and outcomes. This provides the first steps to better understanding the wants and needs of both patients, carers and HCP in setting up future services as well as modifying existing services. Conflicts of Interest The authors declare no conflicts of interest. Data Availability Statement The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to privacy or ethical restrictions.

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.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

⚙ Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-doi-fallback ⓘ

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Condition tags

endometriosischronic_pelvic_pain

MeSH descriptors

Attitude of Health Personnel Attitude of Health Personnel Attitude of Health Personnel Attitude of Health Personnel Attitude of Health Personnel Attitude of Health Personnel Attitude of Health Personnel Attitude of Health Personnel Attitude of Health Personnel Attitude of Health Personnel Attitude of Health Personnel Attitude of Health Personnel Attitude of Health Personnel Attitude of Health Personnel Attitude of Health Personnel Attitude of Health Personnel Attitude of Health Personnel Attitude of Health Personnel Attitude of Health Personnel Attitude of Health Personnel

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. This is a recent paper (2026) — citers typically take a year or two to land, and the OpenAlex reference graph may still be filling in.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-09-07T06:12:11.729357+00:00
pubmed
last seen: 2026-09-07T06:07:11.833256+00:00
unpaywall
last seen: 2026-09-07T06:27:18.705824+00:00
License: public-domain-us · commercial use OK · attribution required
Courtesy of the U.S. National Library of Medicine