Qualitative study uncovers stigma related to pelvic floor disorders in Chinese middle-aged women, highlighting the need for cultural awareness and support.
Pelvic floor disorders (PFDs) commonly evoke stigma, leading to delayed healthcare seeking and significantly impaired quality of life. For Chinese middle-aged women, this stigma is intensified by specific cultural norms and the pressures of their unique life stage. However, there is a lack of studies focusing on how this population experiences PFD-related stigma in the Chinese context. This study aiming to identify how Chinese middle-aged women experience and construct the meaning of PFDs-related stigma in their daily lives. An interpretive qualitative study was conducted. Seventeen Chinese middle-aged women with PFDs were recruited via purposive and snowball sampling from a specialized pelvic floor rehabilitation clinic in Shanghai between November 2024 and May 2025. Data were generated through semi-structured in-depth interviews and analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. The analysis revealed that stigma is a concentric experience constituted of four themes. (1) Individual Stigma: body out of control, aging anxiety, sexual failure. (2) Interpersonal Stigma: implicit exclusion in family, workplace marginalization. (3) Cultural Stigma: “face” principle, gendered ageism, unclean in gynecological Issues, intergenerational transmission. (4) Institutional Stigma: secondary iatrogenic harm, systemic exclusion. The stigma experienced by Chinese middle-aged women with PFDs is a complex social product operating at individual, interpersonal, cultural, and institutional levels. Addressing this requires a multi-level approach. It calls for a dismantling of the “gendered ageism” that frames the aging female body as low-value. Moreover, it contributes to increasing awareness of the stigma from Chinese culture, and need for epistemic justice and structural support, urging a shift from a narrative of private stigma to one of rights to restore the dignity of these women.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ge et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: