Women's perspectives on pelvic pain: insights into the emotional and diagnostic journey in primary care

Observational OA: closed CC0
⚙ AI-generated summary by qwen3.7-flash, 2026-10-11 ⓘ

A survey of 45 women with pelvic pain revealed significant physical and emotional impacts, highlighting disparities in GP experiences where patients reported both validation and dismissal during their diagnostic journey.

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

⚙ AI-generated deep summary by qwen3.7-flash, 2026-09-21 · read from full text ⓘ

This study surveyed 550 female patients at a general practice to evaluate the emotional and diagnostic experiences associated with pelvic pain. Among the 45 respondents reporting pain, the condition significantly impaired quality of life and emotional well-being, with many describing their symptoms using terms related to physical trauma. The research highlighted a disparity in clinical interactions, where some women felt validated while others experienced dismissal or confusion during GP consultations. Relevance to endometriosis: pelvic pain is a primary symptom of endometriosis, making this paper relevant to understanding patient barriers in diagnosing adenomyosis and endometriosis within primary care settings.

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

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Pelvic pain is a common presentation in general practice and can significantly affect women's quality of life. Ensuring that women feel heard and their concerns acted upon is integral to accurate diagnosis and early management in primary care. AIM: To explore patient perspectives on the emotional and diagnostic journey of pelvic pain. METHOD: A survey was distributed to 550 female patients aged >18 at a GP practice in West Bridgford, Nottingham. It explored the physical and emotional impacts of pelvic pain and interactions with healthcare professionals using multiple-choice questions, 10-point Likert scales, and open-ended responses. Quantitative data were analysed descriptively, and qualitative data thematically. RESULTS: Between July and September 2025, 81 responses were received and 45 (55.6%) reported pelvic pain (mean age 41.9 years, range 18-90). Of these, 22 (48.9%) had a diagnosis explaining their symptoms. Pain descriptors frequently reflected physical and emotional trauma ('stabbing', 'agonising', 'crippling'). Average impact scores were high: 7.5 out of 10 for quality of life; 7.9 out of 10 for emotional well-being. Disruptions were reported in physical functioning (20 mentions), work and education (18), and social restrictions (13), alongside relationships, fertility, and mental health. Thirty-eight sought GP advice; 7 did not, citing normalisation of pain and fear of dismissal. Experiences in GP consultations were mixed: some felt validated and supported (15 mentions), others described dismissal or patronisation (20), confusion (8), and frustration (7). CONCLUSION: Pelvic pain has profound physical, psychological, and social impacts. Patient accounts highlight the need for timely recognition, empathetic listening, and clear communication in primary care.
Full text 1,858 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · 4 sections · click to expand

Abstract

Background Pelvic pain is a common presentation in general practice and can significantly affect women’s quality of life. Ensuring that women feel heard and their concerns acted upon is integral to accurate diagnosis and early management in primary care. Aim To explore patient perspectives on the emotional and diagnostic journey of pelvic pain.

Method

A survey was distributed to 550 female patients aged >18 at a GP practice in West Bridgford, Nottingham. It explored the physical and emotional impacts of pelvic pain and interactions with healthcare professionals using multiple-choice questions, 10-point Likert scales, and open-ended responses. Quantitative data were analysed descriptively, and qualitative data thematically.

Results

Between July and September 2025, 81 responses were received and 45 (55.6%) reported pelvic pain (mean age 41.9 years, range 18–90). Of these, 22 (48.9%) had a diagnosis explaining their symptoms. Pain descriptors frequently reflected physical and emotional trauma (‘stabbing’, ‘agonising’, ‘crippling’). Average impact scores were high: 7.5 out of 10 for quality of life; 7.9 out of 10 for emotional well-being. Disruptions were reported in physical functioning (20 mentions), work and education (18), and social restrictions (13), alongside relationships, fertility, and mental health. Thirty-eight sought GP advice; 7 did not, citing normalisation of pain and fear of dismissal. Experiences in GP consultations were mixed: some felt validated and supported (15 mentions), others described dismissal or patronisation (20), confusion (8), and frustration (7).

Conclusion

Pelvic pain has profound physical, psychological, and social impacts. Patient accounts highlight the need for timely recognition, empathetic listening, and clear communication in primary care. - © British Journal of General Practice 2026

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

MeSH descriptors

Pelvic Pain Pelvic Pain Pelvic Pain Primary Health Care Quality of Life Adolescent Adult Aged Aged, 80 and over Emotions Female General Practice Humans Middle Aged Physician-Patient Relations Surveys and Questionnaires Young Adult

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.

SciLite annotations

organisms 3
noordeloos 2009062 noordeloos 2009062 noordeloos 2009062

Source provenance

openalex
last seen: 2026-08-13T06:08:58.330073+00:00
pubmed
last seen: 2026-10-08T21:55:19.302648+00:00
scilite
last seen: 2026-08-30T09:54:48.501902+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK