##common.pageHeaderLogo.altText##
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.57187/5171

Original article

Vol. 156 No. 10 (2026)

Knowledge, attitudes and practices of Swiss reproductive health and paediatrics professionals regarding female genital mutilation/cutting: a cross-sectional study

Cite this as:
Swiss Med Wkly. 2026;156:5171
Published
30.10.2026

Summary

 

STUDY AIMS: Reproductive health and paediatrics professionals play a key role in the prevention and management of female genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C) and its consequences. While global studies on knowledge, attitudes and practices regarding FGM/C exist, none have specifically focused on these professionals in Switzerland. This study addresses this gap by using a valid, theoretically informed measure to provide new insights into their knowledge and practices regarding FGM/C. The study aimed to identify gaps in knowledge, attitudes, practices and confidence regarding FGM/C among Swiss specialists, to inform training programmes and policy recommendations.

METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey between August and October 2021. Physicians, nurses and midwives working in the reproductive health and paediatrics departments of the five Swiss University hospitals were invited to participate (convenience sampling). The questionnaire was administered in English, and all participants who had at least B1-level English proficiency and who had ever heard of FGM/C were eligible to participate. The primary outcome was knowledge score on FGM/C, and exploratory outcomes included attitudes, self-reported practices and confidence levels.

RESULTS: A total of 127 reproductive health workers and 76 paediatrics workers completed the survey. Mean knowledge scores were 25.7/31 for reproductive health and 19.5/27 for paediatrics workers; the differing denominators reflect the distinct number of knowledge items included in each group’s specific questionnaire modules. Knowledge gaps common to both groups included correct identification of WHO FGM/C types (reproductive health: 35–68%; paediatrics: 9–18%), and awareness of surgical treatment options. Reproductive health workers demonstrated low knowledge regarding indications for caesarean in patients with infibulation (66%), while paediatrics workers were less familiar with the Swiss legal context and reporting regulations. While healthcare providers generally condemned the practice of FGM/C and recognised their responsibility to address it with patients, most perceived women with FGM/C as “victims” and the communities that practice it as oppressive. Confidence levels were particularly low regarding the visual identification of FGM/C in children and coding capacities.

CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to assess specialists’ knowledge, attitudes, practices and confidence regarding FGM/C at a national level. It highlights key gaps to address in future training programmes – including both biomedical skills and also bias awareness – with particular attention to inter-regional differences and underscores the need for accessible national and local guidelines to be actively implemented in all hospitals.

References

  1. 1. WHO. Female genital mutilation. In: Female Genital Mutilation. CRC Press; 1999. p. 17-24. doi:10.1201/9781785230189-11 Available from: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/female-genital-mutilation
  2. 2. WHO. Ensuring quality and ethics of research on FGM: new WHO guidance out now [Internet]. Available from: https://www.who.int/news/item/27-01-2022-ensuring-quality-and-ethics-of-research-on-fgm-new-who-guidance-out-now
  3. 3. World Health Organization. WHO guideline on the prevention of female genital mutilation and clinical management of complications. Web Annex B. Evidence-to-Decision tables. World Health Organization; 2025. doi:10.2471/b09319 Available from: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240107281
  4. 4. Abdulcadir J, Rodriguez MI, Say L. Research gaps in the care of women with female genital mutilation: an analysis. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology. 2015 Feb;122(3):294-303. doi:10.1111/1471-0528.13217
  5. 5. Abdulcadir J, Say L, Pallitto C. What do we know about assessing healthcare students and professionals’ knowledge, attitude and practice regarding female genital mutilation? A systematic review. Reproductive Health. 2017 Dec;14(1):64. doi:10.1186/s12978-017-0318-1
  6. 6. Molina-Gallego B, Mordillo-Mateos L, de Corral GM, Gómez-Cantarino S, Polonio-López B, Ugarte-Gurrutxaga MI. Female Genital Mutilation: Knowledge and Skills of Health Professionals. Healthcare. 2021 Jul 31;9(8):974. doi:10.3390/healthcare9080974
  7. 7. Trechsel S, Schlauri R. Les mutilations génitales féminines en Suisse. UNICEF; 2012.
  8. 8. UNICEF. Excision, La période qui entoure la naissance – une charnière de la prévention. 2016.
  9. 9. Kaplan-Marcusan A, Torán-Monserrat P, Moreno-Navarro J, Fàbregas MJC, Muñoz-Ortiz L. Perception of primary health professionals about Female Genital Mutilation: from healthcare to intercultural competence. BMC Health Services Research. 2009 Dec;9(1):11. doi:10.1186/1472-6963-9-11
  10. 10. Lane JL, Johnson-Agbakwu CE, Warren N, Budhathoki C, Cole EC. Female Genital Cutting: Clinical knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices from a Provider survey in the US. Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health. 2019 Oct;21(5):954-964. doi:10.1007/s10903-018-0833-3
  11. 11. Dörfler D, Granser S, Gonzalez Barias SP, Kroegler-Halpern K, Sam C, Windsperger K. Prevalence, clinical characteristics and management of female genital mutilation in paediatric and adolescent patients: a retrospective cohort analysis from a clinic in Vienna, Austria. Archives of Disease in Childhood. 2026 Apr 3:archdischild-2025. doi:10.1136/archdischild-2025-330052
  12. 12. Réseau suisse contre lexcision. Points de contact nationaux et régionaux [Internet]. Available from: https://www.excision.ch/reseau/points-de-contact
  13. 13. Marea CX, Bazzoun Y, Warren N, Perrin N, Abdulcadir J. Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices for Care of Women and Girls With FGM/C - A Survey of Health Workers at Swiss University Hospitals. Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health. 2026 Apr 29. doi:10.1007/s10903-026-01930-y
  14. 14. Marea CX, Warren N, Glass N, Ahmed W, Pallitto CC. Advancing the measurement of knowledge, attitudes and practices of health workers who care for women and girls who have undergone female genital mutilation/ cutting (FGM/C): A qualitative exploration of expert opinion. PLOS ONE. 2023 Apr 27;18(4):e0284900. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0284900
  15. 15. Le Coeur C, Ondet M, Vigoureux S, Charlier C, Lemaignen A, Tantet C. Female genital mutilation/cutting: knowledge, attitudes, and practices among key caregivers: a French national survey. BMC Medical Education. 2025 Feb 25;25(1):301. doi:10.1186/s12909-025-06715-9
  16. 16. O’Neill S, Richard F, Alexander S, Godin I. Knowledge of female genital cutting among health and social care professionals in Francophone Belgium: A cross-sectional survey. PLOS Global Public Health. 2024 Jul 18;4(7):e0002225. doi:10.1371/journal.pgph.0002225
  17. 17. González-Timoneda A, Ruiz Ros V, González-Timoneda M, Cano Sánchez A. Knowledge, attitudes and practices of primary healthcare professionals to female genital mutilation in Valencia, Spain: are we ready for this challenge?. BMC Health Services Research. 2018 Dec;18(1):579. doi:10.1186/s12913-018-3396-z
  18. 18. Young J, Rodrigues KK, Imam B, Johnson-Agbakwu C. Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting—Pediatric Physician Knowledge, Training, and General Practice Approach. Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health. 2020 Aug;22(4):668-674. doi:10.1007/s10903-019-00938-x
  19. 19. Sureshkumar P, Zurynski Y, Moloney S, Raman S, Varol N, Elliott EJ. Female genital mutilation: Survey of paediatricians’ knowledge, attitudes and practice. Child Abuse & Neglect. 2016 May;55:1-9. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2016.03.005
  20. 20. Purchase TCD, Lamoudi M, Colman S, Allen S, Latthe P, Jolly K. A survey on knowledge of female genital mutilation guidelines. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica. 2013 Jul;92(7):858-861. doi:10.1111/aogs.12144
  21. 21. Relph S, Inamdar R, Singh H, Yoong W. Female genital mutilation/cutting: knowledge, attitude and training of health professionals in inner city London. European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology. 2013 Jun;168(2):195-198. doi:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2013.01.004
  22. 22. Zurynski Y, Sureshkumar P, Phu A, Elliott E. Female genital mutilation and cutting: a systematic literature review of health professionals’ knowledge, attitudes and clinical practice. BMC International Health and Human Rights. 2015 Dec;15(1):32. doi:10.1186/s12914-015-0070-y
  23. 23. Zaidi N, Khalil A, Roberts C, Browne M. Knowledge of female genital mutilation among healthcare professionals. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology. 2007 Jan;27(2):161-164. doi:10.1080/01443610601124257
  24. 24. Conseil fédéral. Mesures contre les mutilations génitales féminines [Internet]. Available from: https://www.news.admin.ch/fr/nsb?id=81313
  25. 25. Réseau suisse contre lexcision. Excisions/mutilations génitales féminines (E/MGF) - recommandations interdisciplinaires à lintention des professionnel.le.s de la santé [Internet]. Available from: https://www.excision.ch/public/documents/Netzwerk-Dokumente/2023_Empfehlungen_EMGF.pdf
  26. 26. WHO. Female genital mutilation. In: Female Genital Mutilation. CRC Press; 1999. p. 17-24. doi:10.1201/9781785230189-11 Available from: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/female-genital-mutilation
  27. 27. Bonavina G, Spinillo SL, Sotiriadis A, Bulfoni A, Kaltoud R, Salvatore S, et al. Effect of type III female genital mutilation on obstetric outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Heliyon. 2024 Apr;10(8):e29336. doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e29336
  28. 28. Bazzoun Y, Aerts L, Abdulcadir J. Surgical Treatments of Chronic Vulvar Pain After Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting. The Journal of Sexual Medicine. 2022 Feb 1;19(2):290-301. doi:10.1016/j.jsxm.2021.11.010
  29. 29. Villani M. Reparative Approaches in Medicine and the Different Meanings of "Reparation" for Women with FGM/C in a Migratory Context. Diversity & Equality in Health and Care. 2017;14(5). doi:10.21767/2049-5471.1000120
  30. 30. Jordal M, Levin L, Påfs J, Griffin G, Wahlberg A. Swedish Gynecologists’ Positioning in Relation to Clitoral Reconstruction After Female Genital Cutting. A Qualitative Interview Study. International Journal of Sexual Health. 2021 Jan 2;33(1):76-87. doi:10.1080/19317611.2020.1853301
  31. 31. Johnson-Agbakwu CE, Manin E. Sculptors of African Women’s Bodies: Forces Reshaping the Embodiment of Female Genital Cutting in the West. Archives of Sexual Behavior. 2021 Jul;50(5):1949-1957. doi:10.1007/s10508-020-01710-1
  32. 32. Bennett T. "Beauty" and 'The Beast": Analogising Between Cosmetic Surgery and Female Genital Mutilation. Flinders Law Journal. 2012;14(1):49–68.
  33. 33. Bader D. Nationalisme sexuel : le cas de l’excision et de la chirurgie esthétique génitale dans les discours d’experts en Suisse. Swiss Journal of Sociology. 2016 Nov 16;42(3):574-598. doi:10.1515/sjs-2016-0025
  34. 34. Metaxas T, Earp BD, Bader D, Ghasemi S, Solari M, Abdulcadir J. Clinical, Ethical, and Legal Considerations Raised by Self-Reported Genital Mutilation Following Voluntary Cosmetic Labiaplasty. Archives of Sexual Behavior. 2025 Jan;54(1):399-415. doi:10.1007/s10508-024-03058-2
  35. 35. Earp BD, Shahvisi A, Reis-Dennis S, Reis E. The need for a unified ethical stance on child genital cutting. Nursing Ethics. 2021 Nov;28(7-8):1294-1305. doi:10.1177/0969733020983397
  36. 36. Vissandjée B, Denetto S, Migliardi P, Proctor J. Female genital cutting (FGC) and the ethics of care: community engagement and cultural sensitivity at the interface of migration experiences. BMC International Health and Human Rights. 2014 Dec;14(1):13. doi:10.1186/1472-698X-14-13
  37. 37. Dunning–Kruger effect [Internet]. 2025. Available from: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect&oldid=1317670006
  38. 38. Abdulcadir J, Guedj NS, Yaron M, Abdulcadir O, Albert J, Caillet M, et al. Assessing the Infant/Child/Young Person with Suspected FGM/C. In: Abdulcadir J, Sachs Guedj N, Yaron M, editors. Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting in Children and Adolescents. Cham (CH): Springer International Publishing; 2022. p. 3-14. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-81736-7_1 Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK592360/
  39. 39. Korczak DJ, MacArthur C, Katzman DK. Canadian pediatric residents’ experience and level of comfort with adolescent gynecological health care. Journal of Adolescent Health. 2006 Jan;38(1):57-59. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2004.11.131
  40. 40. Cosgrave EJ, Geraghty JM, Geoghegan AR. Identifying a Knowledge Deficit among Pediatric and General Practitioner Trainees in Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology in an Irish Hospital: A Pilot Study. Journal of Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology. 2021 Oct;34(5):631-634. doi:10.1016/j.jpag.2021.01.012
  41. 41. Adams JA. Understanding Medical Findings in Child Sexual Abuse: An Update For 2018. Academic Forensic Pathology. 2018 Dec;8(4):924-937. doi:10.1177/1925362118821491
  42. 42. Federal Office of Public Health, FOPH. Female genital mutilation. In: Female Genital Mutilation. CRC Press; 1999. p. 17-24. doi:10.1201/9781785230189-11 Available from: https://www.bag.admin.ch/en/statement-opposing-female-genital-mutilation
  43. 43. Dixon S, Shacklock J, Leach J. Female genital mutilation: barriers to accessing care. BMJ. 2019 Mar 4:l921. doi:10.1136/bmj.l921
  44. 44. Young J, Nour NM, Macauley RC, Narang SK, Johnson-Agbakwu C, Suchdev P, et al. Diagnosis, Management, and Treatment of Female Genital Mutilation or Cutting in Girls. Pediatrics. 2020 Aug 1;146(2):e20201012. doi:10.1542/peds.2020-1012
  45. 45. Réseau suisse contre lexcision. Le cas de Boudry: Prise de position du Réseau suisse contre l'excision [Internet]. Available from: https://www.excision.ch/reseau/actualite/article/le-cas-de-boudry-prise-de-position-du-reseau-suisse-contre-lexcision
  46. 46. Johnsdotter S, Wendel L, Grönvall K, Essén B. Genital examinations in cases of suspected ‘female genital mutilation’ in Sweden 1982–2022: lawful decisions resulting in structural injustice. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications. 2025 Jul 26;12(1):1191. doi:10.1057/s41599-025-05476-6
  47. 47. Johnsdotter S. Meaning well while doing harm: compulsory genital examinations in Swedish African girls. Sexual and Reproductive Health Matters. 2019 May 31;27(2):87-99. doi:10.1080/26410397.2019.1586817
  48. 48. Cottler-Casanova S, Horowicz M, Gayet-Ageron A, Abdulcadir J. Female genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C) coding capacities in Swiss university hospitals using the International Classification of Diseases (ICD). BMC Public Health. 2021 Dec;21(1):1151. doi:10.1186/s12889-021-11160-6
  49. 49. Elliott C, Creighton SM, Barker M, Liao L. A brief interactive training for health care professionals working with people affected by “female genital mutilation”: initial pilot evaluation with psychosexual therapists. Sexual and Relationship Therapy. 2016 Jan 2;31(1):70-82. doi:10.1080/14681994.2015.1093614
  50. 50. Kimani S, Esho T, Kimani V, Muniu S, Kamau J, Kigondu C, et al. Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting: Innovative Training Approach for Nurse-Midwives in High Prevalent Settings. Obstetrics and Gynecology International. 2018;2018:1-12. doi:10.1155/2018/5043512
  51. 51. Market M, Grondin M, Boucher D, Malic C. Canadian medical student knowledge and attitudes toward female genital mutilation. Education for Health. 2023;36(1):38. doi:10.4103/efh.efh_18_22
  52. 52. Ahmed W, Abdelrahim M, Gloyd S, Farquhar C, Puttkammer N. Evaluating the long-term impact of large-scale trainings: an exposure based cross-sectional study on female genital mutilation-related knowledge, attitudes and practices among Sudanese midwives in Khartoum State. BMJ Open. 2024 Jan;14(1):e076830. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2023-07683

Most read articles by the same author(s)