A Qualitative Study of Patients' Use of Expedited Partner Therapy

Temkin, Elizabeth; Klassen, Ann C.; Mmari, Kristin; Gillespie, Duff

doi:10.1097/olq.0b013e31820cb206

Cited by 18 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…7,12,13,17–20 For PDPT, we used 5 estimates from 5 studies published between 2005 and 2011, using the same literature search (by keeping the patient referral and PDPT search time frames to the same period, we minimized time confounds). 12,13,20–22 There were 1781 patients and 3125 partners. For DIS referral, we used program data on gonorrhea PN collected from a convenience sample of STD programs between 2010 and 2012.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One study in our sample, however, reported a high concordance between patient and partner reports of treatment ( r = 0.88), 20 and the estimates from another study with extensive patient follow-up questioning, including for adverse events such as domestic violence, were similar to those from studies with less intensive study. 22 Most data were collected in STD clinics or similar facilities; a broader variety of clinical settings would improve estimates for patient referral and PDPT. We also lacked sufficient studies and program estimates to generate distributions of estimates and thus propagate probabilities across the cascades.…”

Section: Limitations and Future Directionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Assessing Different Partner Notification Methods for Assuring Partner Treatment for Gonorrhea: Looking for the Best Mix of Options

Fleming

Hogben

2017

Journal of Public Health Management and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Limitations and Future Directionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing Different Partner Notification Methods for Assuring Partner Treatment for Gonorrhea: Looking for the Best Mix of Options

Fleming

Hogben

2017

Journal of Public Health Management and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Especially motivational interviewing helps patients to formulate their own needs and possible solutions. There is room for improvement with regard to counselling competencies of GPs [ 21 ]. A difference between professionals at GP practices and SHC is that the latter are used to address sexual health in a neutral way and use motivational interviewing [ 22 – 24 ], while some GPs seem to show uneasiness in discussing sexual health and use authoritative and judging manners in communication with patients.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A pill for the partner via the chlamydia patient? Results from a mixed method study among sexual health care providers in the Netherlands

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundChlamydia prevalence in the Netherlands remains high despite targeted efforts. Effective Partner Notification (PN) and Partner Treatment (PT) can interrupt transmission and prevent re-infections. Patient Initiated Partner Treatment (PIPT) may strengthen chlamydia control. This study explores the current practice of PN and PT, and benefits of, and barriers and facilitators for PIPT among professionals in sexual health care in the Netherlands.MethodsA qualitative study was performed among GPs, GP-assistants (GPAs), physicians and nurses working at Sexual Health Clinics (SHC) and key-informants on ethnical diversity using topic lists in focus groups (N = 40) and semi-structured questionnaires in individual interviews (N = 9). Topics included current practices regarding PN and PT, attitude regarding PIPT, and perceived barriers and facilitators for PIPT. Interviews were taped, transcribed verbatim, and coded using ATLAS.ti. A quantitative online questionnaire on the same topics was sent to all physicians and nurses employed at Dutch SHC (complete response rate 26% (84/321)).ResultsThe qualitative study showed that all professionals support the need for more attention to PN, and that they saw advantages in PIPT. Mentioned barriers included unwilling PN-behaviour, Dutch legislation, several medical considerations and inadequate skills of GPs. Also, concerns about limited knowledge of cultural sensitivity around PN and PT were raised. Mentioned facilitators of PIPT were reliable home based test-kits, phone-contact between professionals and notified partners, more consultation time for GPs or GPAs and additional training. The online questionnaire showed that SHC employees agreed that partners should be treated as soon as possible, but also that they were reluctant towards PIPT without counselling and testing.ConclusionsProfessionals saw advantages in PIPT, but they also identified barriers hampering the potential introduction of PIPT. Improving PN and counselling skills with specific focus on cultural sensitivity is needed. PIPT could be considered for specific partners. PIPT in combination with home based testing and using e-healthcare should be further explored and developed.

show abstract

“…Despite this, most pharmacists agreed that the private consultation rooms in their pharmacy provided adequate privacy for an EPT consultation. It is well-documented that privacy and confidentiality are essential components of any form of partner treatment model [ 21 , 36 , 37 , 38 ]. Post-implementation research into pharmacist-provided EHC in Australia has shown that privacy is not always assured during sexual health consultations.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Barriers and Facilitators of Partner Treatment of Chlamydia: A Qualitative Investigation with Prescribers and Community Pharmacists

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Chlamydia trachomatis is the most frequently-notified sexually transmitted infection in Australia. Effective and timely partner treatment of chlamydia is essential to reduce overall prevalence and the burden of infection. Currently in most of Australia, the only avenue for partner treatment of chlamydia (“standard partner therapy”) is a tedious, and often inconvenient, process. The barriers and facilitators of standard partner therapy, and newer models of accelerated partner therapy (APT), need to be identified in the Australian setting. Additionally, the potential role of community pharmacists need to be explored. Semi-structured interview guides for two key stakeholder groups (prescribers and pharmacists) were developed and piloted. Eleven prescribers (general practitioners, sexual health clinicians and nurse practitioners) and twelve pharmacists practicing in the Perth metropolitan region were interviewed. Key reported barriers to standard partner therapy were lack of or delayed chlamydia testing. Key facilitators included ability to test and educate sexual partner. Key barriers for APT included prescribers’ legal responsibility and potential for medication-related adverse effects. Healthcare provider consultation and chlamydia testing were seen as potential facilitators of APT. Pharmacists were receptive to the idea of expanding their role in chlamydia treatment, however, barriers to privacy must be overcome in order to be acceptable to prescribers and pharmacists.

show abstract

A Qualitative Study of Patients' Use of Expedited Partner Therapy

Abstract: Enhancing the counseling that accompanies EPT may improve patients' success in delivering it to their partners.

Cited by 18 publications

References 17 publications

Assessing Different Partner Notification Methods for Assuring Partner Treatment for Gonorrhea: Looking for the Best Mix of Options

Assessing Different Partner Notification Methods for Assuring Partner Treatment for Gonorrhea: Looking for the Best Mix of Options

A pill for the partner via the chlamydia patient? Results from a mixed method study among sexual health care providers in the Netherlands

Barriers and Facilitators of Partner Treatment of Chlamydia: A Qualitative Investigation with Prescribers and Community Pharmacists

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About