PSYCHOMETRIC EVALUATION OF THE TURKISH VERSION OF THE VAGINAL EXAMINATION PERCEPTIONS SCALE

Zehra Baykal Akmeşe; Aysun Ekşioğlu; Fatma Bayraktaroğlu; Francisco J. Bonilla-escobar

doi:10.31067/acusaglik.1770643

PSYCHOMETRIC EVALUATION OF THE TURKISH VERSION OF THE VAGINAL EXAMINATION PERCEPTIONS SCALE

Abstract

Purpose: This study aimed to adapt the Vaginal Examination Perceptions Scale into the Turkish language and evaluate its psychometric properties. Methods: This cross-sectional, methodological study included 296 participants.The scale was reviewed by expert midwifery clinicians and academics to ensure the format, content, and construct validity. Reliability and internal consistency were assessed using Cronbach's alpha and item analysis. Results: Exploratory factor analysis identified three factors, consistent with the original structure, with item loadings ranging from 0.531 to 0.835. Confirmatory factor analysis demonstrated good model fit (χ²/df = 2.357, RMSEA = 0.068, CFI = 0.937, GFI = 0.904, p < .001). The Cronbach's alpha for the 17-item scale was 0.93, indicating excellent reliability. Item-total correlation coefficients ranged from 0.30 to 0.79. Conclusions: The findings confirmed that the Vaginal Examination Perceptions Scale has strong psychometric properties to measure the perception of VE among Turkish women. This sclae is a feasible, reliable, and valid instrument recommended for use in future studies.

Keywords

Supporting Institution

None

Project Number

None

Ethical Statement

The approval to conduct this study was obtained from the Ethics Committee for Non-Interventional Studies at the Ministry of HealthTepecik Health Application and Research Center (Decision No: 2020/9-31, Date: 23.07.2020).

Thanks

The authors would like to acknowledge the kind support of the maternity staffs at Tepecik Training and Research Hospital's Obstetrics and Gynecology Clinic and the pregnant women who provided the database of our work.

References

1. Çalik KY, Karabulutlu Ö, Yavuz C. First do no harm-interventions during labor and maternal satisfaction: a descriptive cross-sectional study. BMC pregnancy and childbirth. 2018;18(1):1-10.
2. Lothian JA. Healthy birth practice# 4: Avoid interventions unless they are medically necessary. The Journal of Perinatal Education. 2014;23(4):198-206. doi:10.1891/1058-1243.28.2.94
3. Dzomeku VM, Mensah AB, Nakua EK, et al. Promoting respectful maternity care: challenges and prospects from the perspectives of midwives at a tertiary health facility in Ghana. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth. 2022;22(1):1-5.
4. Hollander MH, van Hastenberg E, van Dillen J, et al. Preventing traumatic childbirth experiences: 2192 women’s perceptions and views. Archives of women’s mental health. 2017;20(4):515-23.
5. Zafra-Tanaka, Jessica Hanae, Flores-Gonzales PD, et al. Potential excess of vaginal examinations during the management of labor: frequency and associated factors in 13 Peruvian hospitals. Reproductive Health. 2019; 16.1: 146.
6. Bal Z, Uçar T and Kantar EC. Women’s Feeling of Discomfort During Vaginal Examination and Related Factors. Middle Black Sea Journal of Health Science. 2022;8(2):83-92.
7. O’Laughlin DJ, Strelow B, Fellows N, et al. Addressing anxiety and fear during the female pelvic examination. Journal of Primary Care & Community Health. 2021;12:2150132721992195.
8. Bonet M, Oladapo OT, Khan DN, et al. New WHO guidance on prevention and treatment of maternal peripartum infections. The Lancet Global Health. 2015;3(11):e667-8.

9. Amira SF, Mona AE, Soad RA, et al. Women’s Feelings regarding Vaginal Examination during Normal Childbirth. Egyptian Journal of Health Care. 2018;9(2):15-23.
10. Teskereci G, Yangın H and Akpınar A. Experiences of women regarding vaginal examination during labor: A qualitative study. Health Care for Women International. 2020;41(1):75-88.
11. Güneş G, Karaçam Z. Vaginal examination experiences of women in postpartum period: A qualitative research. E-Journal of Dokuz Eylul University Nursing Faculty. 2018;11(2):87-95.
12. Erkek ZY, Özer S. The opinions of mothers regarding the vaginal examination during birth. Journal of Anatolia Nursing and Health Sciences. 2020;23(1):9-16.
13. Lewin D, Fearon B, Hemmings V, et al. Women’s experiences of vaginal examinations in labour. Midwifery. 2005;21(3), 267-277.
14. Bonilla-Escobar FJ, Ortega-Lenis D, Rojas-Mirquez JC, et al. Panamanian women’ s experience of vaginal examination in labour: A questionnaire validation. Midwifery. 2016;36:8-13.
15. Dabagh-Fekri S, Farahani LA, Bazarganipour F, et al. Psychometric properties of the Farsi version of the women’s perceptions of vaginal examination during labor questionnaire. Journal of family medicine and primary care. 2018;7(6):1390. doi: 10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_75_18
16. Herbenick D, Schick V, Reece M, et al. The Female Genital Self‐Image Scale (FGSIS): Results from a nationally representative probability sample of women in the United States. The journal of sexual medicine. 2011;8(1):158-66.
17. Davis LL. Instrument review: Getting the most from your panel of experts. Applied Nursing Research,1992.5: 194–197.
18. Yurdugül H. Using content validity indexes for content validity in scale development studies. XIV. National Educational Sciences Congress. 2005;28(1):771-4.
19. Yeşilyurt S, Çapraz C. A Road Map for the Content Validity Used in Scale Development Studies. Journal of Erzincan University Faculty of Education. 2018;20(1): 251-264. Doi: 10.17556/erziefd.297741
20. Daşıkan Z, Sevil Ü. Psychosocial factors restraining gynecological examinations in women. STED. 2017;26(2):75-83.
21. Ortega C, López C, Romaní F, et al. Percepción y satisfacción de las usuarias de hospitales públicos de Ciudad de Panamá sobre el tacto vaginal durante el trabajo de parto. Revista Peruana de Epidemiología. 2009;13(2):1-7.
22. Alpar R. Applied Statistics and Validity-Reliability Studies with Examples from Sports, Health and Education. 2018. Ankara: Detay Publishing.
23. Ul Hadia N, Abdullah N and Sentosa I. An Easy Approach to Exploratory Factor Analysis: Marketing Perspective. Journal of Educational and Social Research [Internet]. 2016 Jan 5 [cited 2022 Dec 8].
24. Ozbek H, Sumer H. The effects of midwifery approach to the alleviative anxiety level of women coming pelvic examination. CUSBED. 2019;1(4):45-54.
25. El-Moniem EF, Mohamady SH. Effect of vaginal examination frequency practice during normal childbirth on psychophysical condition of women. IOSR Journal of Nursing and Health Science. 2016;5(6):36-44.
26. Erkorkmaz Ü, Etikan İ, Demir O, et al. Doğrulayıcı faktör analizi ve uyum indeksleri. Turkiye Klinikleri Journal of Medical Sciences. 2013;33(1):210-23.
27. Häggsgård C, Nilsson C, Teleman P, et al. Women’s experiences of the second stage of labour. Women and Birth. 2022;35(5):e464-70.
28. Mirghafourvand M, Meedya S, Mohammadi E, et al. Iranian women’s perception on the determinants of birth experience: a qualitative study. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth. 2022;22(1):1-0.
29. Neuhaus LR, Memeti E, Schäffer MK, et al. Using a wrap skirt to improve the pelvic examination experience. Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica. 2016;95(5):534-40.
30. Hassan S, Sundby J, Husseini A, et al. Palestinian women’s feelings and opinions about vaginal examinations during normal childbirth: an exploratory study. The Lancet. 2012;380:S35.

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Clinical Sciences (Other) , Obstetrics and Gynaecology

Journal Section

Research Article

Authors

Zehra Baykal Akmeşe
0000-0002-4753-2421
Türkiye

Aysun Ekşioğlu ^*
0000-0002-8769-3289
Türkiye

Fatma Bayraktaroğlu
0000-0002-9527-6151
Türkiye

Francisco J. Bonilla-escobar
0000-0002-0224-3482
United States

Publication Date

January 16, 2026

Submission Date

August 22, 2025

Acceptance Date

September 22, 2025

Published in Issue

Year 2026 Volume: 17 Number: January, February, March 2026

DOI

https://doi.org/10.31067/acusaglik.1770643

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA67PH35HY

Cite

RIS / Bibtex

EndNote

Baykal Akmeşe Z, Ekşioğlu A, Bayraktaroğlu F, Bonilla-escobar FJ (January 1, 2026) PSYCHOMETRIC EVALUATION OF THE TURKISH VERSION OF THE VAGINAL EXAMINATION PERCEPTIONS SCALE. Acıbadem Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi 17 January, February, March 2026