Dataset Information

Patient preferences for partner notification.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To identify patient preferences for notification of sexual contacts when a sexually transmitted infection (STI) is diagnosed.

Methods

A questionnaire survey of 2544 patients attending three large genitourinary clinics at Derby, Birmingham, and Coventry in the United Kingdom.

Results

The median age of the respondents was 24 with 1474 (57.9%) women, 1835 (72.1%) white, 1826 (71.8%) single. The most favoured method of partner notification was patient referral, which was rated a "good" method by 65.8% when they had to be contacted because a sexual partner has an STI. Notifying contacts by letter as a method of provider partner notification is more acceptable than phoning, text messaging, or email. Respondents with access to mobile telephones, private emails, and private letters were more likely to rate a method of partner notification using that mode of communication as "good" compared to those without. With provider referral methods of partner notification respondents preferred to receive a letter, email, or text message asking them to contact the clinic rather than a letter, email or text message informing them that they may have an STI.

Conclusion

Most respondents think that being informed directly by a partner is the best method of being notified of the risk of an STI. Some of the newer methods may not be acceptable to all but a significant minority of respondents prefer these methods of partner notification. The wording of letters, emails, or text messages when used for partner notification has an influence on the acceptability of the method and may influence success of the partner notification method. Services should be flexible enough to utilise the patients' preferred method of partner notification.

SUBMITTER: Apoola A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2564722 | biostudies-literature | 2006 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Patient preferences for partner notification.

Apoola A A Radcliffe K W KW Das S S Robshaw V V Gilleran G G Kumari B S BS Boothby M M Rajakumar R R

Sexually transmitted infections 20060801 4

<h4>Objective</h4>To identify patient preferences for notification of sexual contacts when a sexually transmitted infection (STI) is diagnosed.<h4>Methods</h4>A questionnaire survey of 2544 patients attending three large genitourinary clinics at Derby, Birmingham, and Coventry in the United Kingdom.<h4>Results</h4>The median age of the respondents was 24 with 1474 (57.9%) women, 1835 (72.1%) white, 1826 (71.8%) single. The most favoured method of partner notification was patient referral, which ...[more]

PMID: 16877586

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportancePatients are increasingly being given access to their test results, but little is known about how preferences vary with the test under consideration or the results of the test (normal or abnormal).ObjectiveThis study was conducted to examine preferences for test result communication.Design, setting, and participantsWe surveyed adults to explore their preferences for test result notification for three common diagnostic tests of varying "emotional impact" (dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry [DXA], genital herpes, and cancer biopsy) when test results were 1) normal and 2) abnormal. We conducted our survey between June and August 2012 on the campus of an academic medical center. For each scenario, subjects were asked to rank seven methods that might be used to communicate test results (letter, unsecured email, secured email, text message, telephone call, secure Web portal, office visit) in order of acceptability.Main outcome measuresThe main measures were the percentage of respondents who ranked a particular test result notification method favorably and the percentage who ranked it as unacceptable.ResultsWhen test results were normal, subjects' notification preferences were generally similar for DXA, herpes and cancer biopsy, with telephone and letter ranked most favorably for all three tests. Conversely, text message and unsecured email were viewed as unacceptable notification methods for normal results by 45.0-55.0 % of subjects across all three tests. When test results were abnormal, office visits became more popular. A higher proportion of subjects ranked office visits as their most preferred notification method for our test with high "emotional impact" (cancer biopsy) (38.4 %) as compared to DXA (28.2 %) and herpes (27.9 %) (P = 0.02). For most test scenarios, younger subjects appeared to rank electronic communication modalities (secure email or Web portal) higher than older subjects, though this difference did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.29).ConclusionsPreferences for test result notification can differ substantially depending upon the test under consideration and results of the test. Providers and health care systems should consider these factors when deciding how to communicate results to patients.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Partner notification is an essential component of sexually transmitted infection (STI) management. The process involves identifying exposed sex partner(s), notifying these partner(s) about their exposure to a curable STI, and offering counselling and treatment for the STI as a part of syndromic management or after results from an STI test. When implemented effectively, partner notification services can prevent the index patient from being reinfected with a curable STI from an untreated partner, reduce the community burden of curable STIs, and prevent adverse health outcomes in both the index patient and his or her sex partner(s). However, partner notification and treatment rates are often low. This study seeks to explore experiences and preferences related to partner notification and treatment for curable STIs among pregnant women receiving care in an antenatal clinic with integrated HIV and curable STI testing. Results are intended to inform efforts to improve partner notification and treatment rates in Southern Africa. METHODS:We conducted qualitative interviews among women diagnosed with Chlamydia trachomatis (CT), Neisseria gonorrhoeae (NG), and/or Trichomonas vaginalis (TV) infection while seeking antenatal care in Gaborone, Botswana. Semi-structured interviews were used to obtain women's knowledge about STIs and their experiences and preferences regarding partner notification. RESULTS:Fifteen women agreed to participate in the study. The majority of women had never heard of CT, NG, or TV infections prior to testing. Thirteen out of 15 participants had notified partners about the STI diagnosis. The majority of notified partners received some treatment; however, partner treatment was often delayed. Most women expressed a preference for accompanying partners to the clinic for treatment. Experiences and preferences did not differ by HIV infection status. CONCLUSIONS:The integration of STI, HIV, and antenatal care services may have contributed to most women's willingness to notify partners. However, logistical barriers to partner treatment remained. More research is needed to identify effective and appropriate strategies for scaling-up partner notification services in order to improve rates of partners successfully contacted and treated, reduce rates of STI reinfection during pregnancy, and ultimately reduce adverse maternal and infant outcomes attributable to antenatal STIs.

Project description:ContextPartner notification for gonorrhea is intended to interrupt transmission and to bring people exposed to infection to care. Partner notification may be initiated through public health professionals (disease intervention specialist: DIS referral) or patients (patient referral). In some cases, patients may carry medications or prescriptions for partners (patient-delivered partner therapy: PDPT).ObjectiveTo examine how patterns of notifying and treating partners of persons with gonorrhea differ by partner notification approach.DesignFrom published literature (2005-2012), we extracted 10 estimates of patient referral data from 7 studies (3853 patients, 7490 partners) and 5 estimates of PDPT data from 5 studies (1781 patients, 3125 partners). For DIS referral estimates, we obtained 2010-2012 data from 14 program settings (4581 patients interviewed, 8301 partners). For each approach, we calculated treatment cascades based on the proportion of partners who were notified and treated. We also calculated cascades based on partners notified and treated per patient diagnosed.ResultsProportions of partners notified and treated were, for patient referral, 56% and 34%; for PDPT, 57% and 46%; for DIS referral, 25% and 22%. Notification and treatment estimates for patient referral and PDPT were significantly higher than for DIS referral, but DIS referral was more efficacious than the other methods in assuring treatment among those notified (all Ps < .001). The notification and treatment ratios per patient seen were, for patient referral, 0.96 and 0.61; for PDPT, 0.90 and 0.73; for DIS referral, 0.45 and 0.40.ConclusionPatient-based methods had higher proportions of partners treated overall, but provider referral had the highest proportion treated among those notified. These data may assist programs to align the most efficacious strategies with the most epidemiologically or clinically important cases while assuring the best scalable standard of care for others.

Project description:ObjectiveTo examine the effectiveness of methods to improve partner notification by patient referral (index patient has responsibility for informing sex partners of their exposure to a sexually transmitted infection).DesignSystematic review of randomised trials of any intervention to supplement simple patient referral.Data sourcesSeven electronic databases searched (January 1990 to December 2005) without language restriction, and reference lists of retrieved articles.Review methodsSelection of trials, data extraction, and quality assessment were done by two independent reviewers. The primary outcome was a reduction of incidence or prevalence of sexually transmitted infections in index patients. If this was not reported data were extracted according to a hierarchy of secondary outcomes: number of partners treated; number of partners tested or testing positive; and number of partners notified, located, or elicited. Random effects meta-analysis was carried out when appropriate.Results14 trials were included with 12 389 women and men diagnosed as having gonorrhoea, chlamydia, non-gonococcal urethritis, trichomoniasis, or a sexually transmitted infection syndrome. All studies had methodological weaknesses that could have biased their results. Three strategies were used. Six trials examined patient delivered partner therapy. Meta-analysis of five of these showed a reduced risk of persistent or recurrent infection in patients with chlamydia or gonorrhoea (summary risk ratio 0.73, 95% confidence interval 0.57 to 0.93). Supplementing patient referral with information for partners was as effective as patient delivered partner therapy. Neither strategy was effective in women with trichomoniasis. Two trials found that providing index patients with chlamydia with sampling kits for their partners increased the number of partners who got treated.ConclusionsInvolving index patients in shared responsibility for the management of sexual partners improves outcomes. Health professionals should consider the following strategies for the management of individual patients: patient delivered partner therapy, home sampling for partners, and providing additional information for partners.

Dataset Information

Patient preferences for partner notification.

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Patient preferences for partner notification.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets