NCT03546114

Brief Summary

This study evaluates patients preference for the gender of their osteopath. All patients referring to an Italian private osteopathic clinic will receive a proper questionnaire before knowing the gender of their designed osteopath.

Trial Health

87
On Track

Trial Health Score

Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach

Enrollment
105

participants targeted

Target at P50-P75 for all trials

Timeline
Completed

Started Apr 2018

Shorter than P25 for all trials

Geographic Reach
1 country

1 active site

Status
completed

Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.

Trial Relationships

Click on a node to explore related trials.

Study Timeline

Key milestones and dates

Study Start

First participant enrolled

April 1, 2018

Completed
2 months until next milestone

First Submitted

Initial submission to the registry

May 21, 2018

Completed
16 days until next milestone

First Posted

Study publicly available on registry

June 6, 2018

Completed
8 months until next milestone

Primary Completion

Last participant's last visit for primary outcome

February 1, 2019

Completed
14 days until next milestone

Study Completion

Last participant's last visit for all outcomes

February 15, 2019

Completed
Last Updated

August 9, 2019

Status Verified

August 1, 2019

Enrollment Period

10 months

First QC Date

May 21, 2018

Last Update Submit

August 7, 2019

Conditions

Keywords

GenderSex and genderPatient preferenceOsteopathic medicine

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

  • Gender questionnaire (Self-reported 13-items questionnaire)

    * Patient's gender? * Patient's age? * Educational level? (middle school, high school, BSc, MSc, PhD) * Naive to osteopathic treatment? (yes/no) * Only if the answer of question 5 is yes, which was the osteopath's gender at your first osteopathic consultation? * Which would be your favorite osteopath's gender? * Which would be your favorite osteopath's gender if you had low back pain? * Which would be your favorite osteopath's gender if you had neck pain? * Which would be your favorite osteopath's gender if you had gastrointestinal disorders? * Which would be your favorite osteopath's gender if you had upper limb pain? * Which would be your favorite osteopath's gender if you had lower limb pain? * Which would be your favorite osteopath's gender if you had headache? * Which would be your favorite osteopath's gender if you had urogenital disorders? Questions 7-13: Choose among: female, male, no preference

    1 day

Study Arms (1)

Patients referring to an osteopathic clinic - CMO, Milan

Adults, age\>18 years, first visit at osteopathic clinic (Centro di Medicina Osteopatica)

Other: Gender Questionnaire

Interventions

13-items questionnaire including demographics questions (gender, age, education; naive to osteopathic treatment or not; general gender preferences; specific gender preference in case of low back pain, neck pain, gastrointestinal disorders, musculoskeletal disorders of upper and lower limbs pain; headache; urogenital disorders

Patients referring to an osteopathic clinic - CMO, Milan

Eligibility Criteria

Age18 Years+
Sexall
Healthy VolunteersYes
Age GroupsAdult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)
Sampling MethodNon-Probability Sample
Study Population

Adult patients referring to Centro di Medicina Osteopatica for the first visit.

Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.

Sponsors & Collaborators

Study Sites (1)

Istituto Superiore di Osteopatia

Milan, MI, 20126, Italy

Location

Related Publications (49)

  • Abghari MS, Takemoto R, Sadiq A, Karia R, Phillips D, Egol KA. Patient perceptions and preferences when choosing an orthopaedic surgeon. Iowa Orthop J. 2014;34:204-8.

    PMID: 25328483BACKGROUND
  • Alvarez Bustins G, Lopez Plaza PV, Carvajal SR. Profile of osteopathic practice in Spain: results from a standardized data collection study. BMC Complement Altern Med. 2018 Apr 11;18(1):129. doi: 10.1186/s12906-018-2190-0.

    PMID: 29642901BACKGROUND
  • Amir H, Beri A, Yechiely R, Amir Levy Y, Shimonov M, Groutz A. Do Urology Male Patients Prefer Same-Gender Urologist? Am J Mens Health. 2018 Sep;12(5):1379-1383. doi: 10.1177/1557988316650886. Epub 2016 May 24.

    PMID: 27222116BACKGROUND
  • Amodio DM. The neuroscience of prejudice and stereotyping. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2014 Oct;15(10):670-82. doi: 10.1038/nrn3800. Epub 2014 Sep 4.

    PMID: 25186236BACKGROUND
  • Balayla J. Male physicians treating Female patients: Issues, Controversies and Gynecology. Mcgill J Med. 2011 Jun;13(1):72. No abstract available.

    PMID: 22399872BACKGROUND
  • Bishop FL, Massey Y, Yardley L, Lewith GT. How patients choose acupuncturists: a mixed-methods project. J Altern Complement Med. 2011 Jan;17(1):19-25. doi: 10.1089/acm.2010.0061. Epub 2011 Jan 16.

    PMID: 21235412BACKGROUND
  • Bishop FL, Bradbury K, Hj Jeludin NN, Massey Y, Lewith GT. How patients choose osteopaths: a mixed methods study. Complement Ther Med. 2013 Feb;21(1):50-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ctim.2012.10.003. Epub 2012 Nov 15.

    PMID: 23374205BACKGROUND
  • Blanch-Hartigan D, Hall JA, Roter DL, Frankel RM. Gender bias in patients' perceptions of patient-centered behaviors. Patient Educ Couns. 2010 Sep;80(3):315-20. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2010.06.014. Epub 2010 Jul 17.

    PMID: 20638813BACKGROUND
  • Burke SR, Myers R, Zhang AL. A profile of osteopathic practice in Australia 2010-2011: a cross sectional survey. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2013 Aug 1;14:227. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-14-227.

    PMID: 23915239BACKGROUND
  • Cerritelli F, van Dun PLS, Esteves JE, Consorti G, Sciomachen P, Lacorte E, Vanacore N; OPERA-IT Group. The Italian Osteopathic Practitioners Estimates and RAtes (OPERA) study: A cross sectional survey. PLoS One. 2019 Jan 25;14(1):e0211353. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0211353. eCollection 2019.

    PMID: 30682169BACKGROUND
  • Cerritelli F, Verzella M, Barlafante G. Quality of life in patients referring to private osteopathic clinical practice: a prospective observational study. Complement Ther Med. 2014 Aug;22(4):625-31. doi: 10.1016/j.ctim.2014.05.007. Epub 2014 May 24.

    PMID: 25146065BACKGROUND
  • Cil TD, Easson AM. The role of gender in patient preference for breast surgical care - a comment on equality. Isr J Health Policy Res. 2018 Jul 9;7(1):37. doi: 10.1186/s13584-018-0231-2.

    PMID: 29983118BACKGROUND
  • Consorti F, Mancuso R, Piccolo A, Consorti G, Zurlo J. Evaluation of the acceptability of Peer Physical Examination (PPE) in medical and osteopathic students: a cross sectional survey. BMC Med Educ. 2013 Aug 22;13:111. doi: 10.1186/1472-6920-13-111.

    PMID: 23968312BACKGROUND
  • Furnham A, Petrides KV, Temple J. Patient preferences for medical doctors. Br J Health Psychol. 2006 Sep;11(Pt 3):439-49. doi: 10.1348/135910705X67529.

    PMID: 16870054BACKGROUND
  • Grinberg M, Lopes AS. Feminization of medicine. Arq Bras Cardiol. 2013 Sep;101(3):283. doi: 10.5935/abc.20130175. No abstract available.

    PMID: 24061755BACKGROUND
  • Groutz A, Amir H, Caspi R, Sharon E, Levy YA, Shimonov M. Do women prefer a female breast surgeon? Isr J Health Policy Res. 2016 Dec 1;5:35. doi: 10.1186/s13584-016-0094-3. eCollection 2016.

    PMID: 27980717BACKGROUND
  • Hall JA, Roter DL. Do patients talk differently to male and female physicians? A meta-analytic review. Patient Educ Couns. 2002 Dec;48(3):217-24. doi: 10.1016/s0738-3991(02)00174-x.

    PMID: 12477606BACKGROUND
  • Janssen SM, Lagro-Janssen AL. Physician's gender, communication style, patient preferences and patient satisfaction in gynecology and obstetrics: a systematic review. Patient Educ Couns. 2012 Nov;89(2):221-6. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2012.06.034. Epub 2012 Jul 21.

    PMID: 22819711BACKGROUND
  • Johnson SM, Kurtz ME. Osteopathic manipulative treatment techniques preferred by contemporary osteopathic physicians. J Am Osteopath Assoc. 2003 May;103(5):219-24.

    PMID: 12776762BACKGROUND
  • Myers SS, Phillips RS, Davis RB, Cherkin DC, Legedza A, Kaptchuk TJ, Hrbek A, Buring JE, Post D, Connelly MT, Eisenberg DM. Patient expectations as predictors of outcome in patients with acute low back pain. J Gen Intern Med. 2008 Feb;23(2):148-53. doi: 10.1007/s11606-007-0460-5. Epub 2007 Dec 8.

    PMID: 18066631BACKGROUND
  • Lahat A, Assouline-Dayan Y, Katz LH, Fidder HH. The preference for an endoscopist specific sex: a link between ethnic origin, religious belief, socioeconomic status, and procedure type. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2013 Sep 9;7:897-903. doi: 10.2147/PPA.S48468. eCollection 2013.

    PMID: 24043933BACKGROUND
  • McCall B. What does the GDPR mean for the medical community? Lancet. 2018 Mar 31;391(10127):1249-1250. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)30739-6. No abstract available.

    PMID: 29619949BACKGROUND
  • Morin C, Aubin A. Primary reasons for osteopathic consultation: a prospective survey in Quebec. PLoS One. 2014 Sep 3;9(9):e106259. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0106259. eCollection 2014.

    PMID: 25184204BACKGROUND
  • Nolen HA, Moore JX, Rodgers JB, Wang HE, Walter LA. Patient Preference for Physician Gender in the Emergency Department. Yale J Biol Med. 2016 Jun 27;89(2):131-42. eCollection 2016 Jun.

    PMID: 27354840BACKGROUND
  • Olsson M, Martiny SE. Does Exposure to Counterstereotypical Role Models Influence Girls' and Women's Gender Stereotypes and Career Choices? A Review of Social Psychological Research. Front Psychol. 2018 Dec 7;9:2264. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02264. eCollection 2018.

    PMID: 30581398BACKGROUND
  • Rasky E, Waxenegger A, Groth S, Stolz E, Schenouda M, Berzlanovich A. Sex and gender matters : A sex-specific analysis of original articles published in the Wiener klinische Wochenschrift between 2013 and 2015. Wien Klin Wochenschr. 2017 Nov;129(21-22):781-785. doi: 10.1007/s00508-017-1280-1. Epub 2017 Oct 17.

    PMID: 29043442BACKGROUND
  • Rossettini G, Carlino E, Testa M. Clinical relevance of contextual factors as triggers of placebo and nocebo effects in musculoskeletal pain. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2018 Jan 22;19(1):27. doi: 10.1186/s12891-018-1943-8.

    PMID: 29357856BACKGROUND
  • Roter DL, Hall JA. Physician gender and patient-centered communication: a critical review of empirical research. Annu Rev Public Health. 2004;25:497-519. doi: 10.1146/annurev.publhealth.25.101802.123134.

    PMID: 15015932BACKGROUND
  • Roter DL, Hall JA, Aoki Y. Physician gender effects in medical communication: a meta-analytic review. JAMA. 2002 Aug 14;288(6):756-64. doi: 10.1001/jama.288.6.756.

    PMID: 12169083BACKGROUND
  • Shan G, Gerstenberger S. Fisher's exact approach for post hoc analysis of a chi-squared test. PLoS One. 2017 Dec 20;12(12):e0188709. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0188709. eCollection 2017.

    PMID: 29261690BACKGROUND
  • Shin DW, Roter DL, Roh YK, Hahm SK, Cho B, Park HK; Board Certification Committee of The Korean Academy of Family Medicine. Physician gender and patient centered communication: the moderating effect of psychosocial and biomedical case characteristics. Patient Educ Couns. 2015 Jan;98(1):55-60. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2014.10.008. Epub 2014 Oct 23.

    PMID: 25457177BACKGROUND
  • Sandhu H, Adams A, Singleton L, Clark-Carter D, Kidd J. The impact of gender dyads on doctor-patient communication: a systematic review. Patient Educ Couns. 2009 Sep;76(3):348-55. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2009.07.010. Epub 2009 Aug 3.

    PMID: 19647969BACKGROUND
  • Sjostrom O, Holst D. Validity of a questionnaire survey: response patterns in different subgroups and the effect of social desirability. Acta Odontol Scand. 2002 Jun;60(3):136-40. doi: 10.1080/000163502753740133.

    PMID: 12166905BACKGROUND
  • Stenberg G, Fjellman-Wiklund A, Ahlgren C. "Getting confirmation": gender in expectations and experiences of healthcare for neck or back patients. J Rehabil Med. 2012 Feb;44(2):163-71. doi: 10.2340/16501977-0912.

    PMID: 22234575BACKGROUND
  • Street RL Jr. Gender differences in health care provider-patient communication: are they due to style, stereotypes, or accommodation? Patient Educ Couns. 2002 Dec;48(3):201-6. doi: 10.1016/s0738-3991(02)00171-4.

    PMID: 12477604BACKGROUND
  • Testa M, Rossettini G. Enhance placebo, avoid nocebo: How contextual factors affect physiotherapy outcomes. Man Ther. 2016 Aug;24:65-74. doi: 10.1016/j.math.2016.04.006. Epub 2016 Apr 20.

    PMID: 27133031BACKGROUND
  • Petkovic J, Trawin J, Dewidar O, Yoganathan M, Tugwell P, Welch V. Sex/gender reporting and analysis in Campbell and Cochrane systematic reviews: a cross-sectional methods study. Syst Rev. 2018 Aug 2;7(1):113. doi: 10.1186/s13643-018-0778-6.

    PMID: 30068380BACKGROUND
  • Varadarajulu S, Petruff C, Ramsey WH. Patient preferences for gender of endoscopists. Gastrointest Endosc. 2002 Aug;56(2):170-3. doi: 10.1016/s0016-5107(02)70173-9.

    PMID: 12145592BACKGROUND
  • Vieder JN, Krafchick MA, Kovach AC, Galluzzi KE. Physician-patient interaction: what do elders want? J Am Osteopath Assoc. 2002 Feb;102(2):73-8.

    PMID: 11866395BACKGROUND
  • Wang MT, Degol JL. Gender Gap in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM): Current Knowledge, Implications for Practice, Policy, and Future Directions. Educ Psychol Rev. 2017 Mar;29(1):119-140. doi: 10.1007/s10648-015-9355-x. Epub 2016 Jan 13.

    PMID: 28458499BACKGROUND
  • Barrett LF, Bliss-Moreau E. She's emotional. He's having a bad day: attributional explanations for emotion stereotypes. Emotion. 2009 Oct;9(5):649-58. doi: 10.1037/a0016821.

    PMID: 19803587BACKGROUND
  • Carey TS, Motyka TM, Garrett JM, Keller RB. Do osteopathic physicians differ in patient interaction from allopathic physicians? An empirically derived approach. J Am Osteopath Assoc. 2003 Jul;103(7):313-8.

    PMID: 12884943BACKGROUND
  • Chur-Hansen A. Preferences for female and male nurses: the role of age, gender and previous experience --year 2000 compared with 1984. J Adv Nurs. 2002 Jan;37(2):192-8. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2648.2002.02079.x.

    PMID: 11851787BACKGROUND
  • Ino T, Nakai R, Azuma T, Kimura T, Fukuyama H. Gender differences in brain activation during encoding and recognition of male and female faces. Brain Imaging Behav. 2010 Mar;4(1):55-67. doi: 10.1007/s11682-009-9085-0.

    PMID: 20503114BACKGROUND
  • Kret ME, De Gelder B. A review on sex differences in processing emotional signals. Neuropsychologia. 2012 Jun;50(7):1211-21. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2011.12.022. Epub 2012 Jan 8.

    PMID: 22245006BACKGROUND
  • LaFrance M, Hecht MA, Paluck EL. The contingent smile: a meta-analysis of sex differences in smiling. Psychol Bull. 2003 Mar;129(2):305-34. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.129.2.305.

    PMID: 12696842BACKGROUND
  • Nijs J, Roussel N, Paul van Wilgen C, Koke A, Smeets R. Thinking beyond muscles and joints: therapists' and patients' attitudes and beliefs regarding chronic musculoskeletal pain are key to applying effective treatment. Man Ther. 2013 Apr;18(2):96-102. doi: 10.1016/j.math.2012.11.001. Epub 2012 Dec 28.

    PMID: 23273516BACKGROUND
  • Rizk DE, El-Zubeir MA, Al-Dhaheri AM, Al-Mansouri FR, Al-Jenaibi HS. Determinants of women's choice of their obstetrician and gynecologist provider in the UAE. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2005 Jan;84(1):48-53. doi: 10.1111/j.0001-6349.2005.00705.x.

    PMID: 15603567BACKGROUND
  • Tourangeau R, Yan T. Sensitive questions in surveys. Psychol Bull. 2007 Sep;133(5):859-83. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.133.5.859.

    PMID: 17723033BACKGROUND

MeSH Terms

Conditions

CoitusPatient Preference

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Sexual BehaviorBehaviorPatient SatisfactionTreatment Adherence and ComplianceHealth Behavior

Study Officials

  • Silvia Ratti, MSc

    Istituto Superiore di Osteopatia (ISO)

    PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Study Design

Study Type
observational
Observational Model
OTHER
Time Perspective
CROSS SECTIONAL
Sponsor Type
OTHER
Responsible Party
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
PI Title
PhD

Study Record Dates

First Submitted

May 21, 2018

First Posted

June 6, 2018

Study Start

April 1, 2018

Primary Completion

February 1, 2019

Study Completion

February 15, 2019

Last Updated

August 9, 2019

Record last verified: 2019-08

Data Sharing

IPD Sharing
Will not share

There is not a plan to make IPD available

Locations