Lj Sutcliffe

Trends in sexually transmitted infections in general practice 1990-2000: population based study using data from the UK general practice research database

Abstract Objective To describe the contribution of primary care to the diagnosis and management of sexually transmitted infections in the United Kingdom, 1990-2000, in the context of increasing incidence of infections in genitourinary medicine clinics. Design Population based study. Setting UK primary care. Participants Patients registered in the UK general practice research database. Main outcome measures Incidence of diagnosed sexually transmitted infections in primary care and estimation of the proportion of major such infections diagnosed in primary care. Results An estimated 23.0% of chlamydia cases in women but only 5.3% in men were diagnosed and treated in primary care during 1998-2000, along with 49.2% cases of non-specific urethritis and urethral discharge in men and 5.7% cases of gonorrhoea in women and 2.9% in men. Rates of diagnosis in primary care rose substantially in the late 1990s. Conclusions A substantial and increasing number of sexually transmitted infections are diagnosed and treated in primary care in the United Kingdom, with sex ratios differing from those in genitourinary medicine clinics. Large numbers of men are treated in primary care for presumptive sexually transmitted infections.

How much do delayed healthcare seeking, delayed care provision, and diversion from primary care contribute to the transmission of STIs?

Objectives: To quantify the contribution of patient delay, provider delay, and diversion between services to delayed access to genitourinary medicine (GUM) clinics. To describe the factors associated with delay, and their contribution to STI transmission. Methods: Cross-sectional survey of 3184 consecutive new patients attending four GUM clinics purposively selected from across England to represent different types of population. Patients completed a short written questionnaire that collected data on sociodemographics, access, and health-seeking behaviour. Questionnaires were then linked to routinely collected individual-level demographic and diagnostic data. Results: Patient delay is a median of 7 days, and does not vary by demographic or social characteristics, or by clinic. However, attendance at a walk-in appointment was associated with a marked reduction in patient delay and provider delay. Among symptomatics, 44.8% of men and 58.0% of women continued to have sex while awaiting treatment, with 7.0% reporting sex with >1 partner; 4.2% of symptomatic patients reported sex without using condoms with new partner(s) since their symptoms had begun. Approximately 25% of all patients had already sought or received care in general practice, and these patients experienced greater provider delay. Conclusions: Walk-in services are associated with a reduction in patient and provider delay, and should be available to all populations. Patients attending primary care require clear care pathways when referred on to GUM clinics. Health promotion should encourage symptomatic patients to seek care quickly, and to avoid sexual contact before treatment.

Can we improve partner notification rates through expedited partner therapy in the UK? Findings from an exploratory trial of Accelerated Partner Therapy (APT)

Objectives To develop two new models of expedited partner therapy for the UK, and evaluate them for feasibility, acceptability and preliminary outcome estimates to inform the design of a randomised controlled trial (RCT). Methods Two models of expedited partner therapy (APTHotline and APTPharmacy), known as ‘Accelerated Partner Therapy’ (APT) were developed. A non-randomised comparative study was conducted of the two APT models and routine partner notification (PN), in which the index patient chose the PN option for his/her partner(s) in two contrasting clinics. Results The proportion of contactable partners treated when routine PN was chosen was 42/117 (36%) and was significantly higher if either APT option was chosen: APTHotline 80/135 (59%), p=0.003; APTPharmacy 29/44 (66%) p=0.001. However, partner treatment was often achieved through other routes. Although 40–60% of partners in APT groups returned urine samples for sexually transmitted infection (STI) testing, almost none accessed HIV and syphilis testing. APT options appear to facilitate faster treatment of sex partners than routine PN. Preferences and recruitment rates varied between sites, related to staff satisfaction with existing routine PN; approach to consent; and possibly, characteristics of local populations. Conclusions Both methods of APT were feasible and acceptable to many patients and led to higher rates of partner treatment than routine PN. Preferences and recruitment rates varied greatly between settings, suggesting that organisational and cultural factors may have an important impact on the feasibility of an RCT and on outcomes. Mindful of these factors, it is proposed that APT should now be evaluated in a cluster RCT.

Where do young men want to access STI screening? A stratified random probability sample survey of young men in Great Britain.

Objectives Rates of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) in UK young people remain high in men and women. However, the National Chlamydia Screening Programme has had limited success in reaching men. The authors explored the acceptability of various medical, recreational and sports venues as settings to access self-collected testing kits for STIs and HIV among men in the general population and those who participate in sport. Methods A stratified random probability survey of 411 (weighted n=632) men in Great Britain aged 18–35 years using computer-assisted personal and self-interviews. Results Young men engaged well with healthcare with 93.5% registered with, and 75.3% having seen, a general practitioner in the last year. 28.7% and 19.8% had previously screened for STIs and HIV, respectively. Willingness to access self-collected tests for STIs (85.1%) and HIV (86.9%) was high. The most acceptable pick-up points for testing kits were general practice 79.9%, GUM 66.8% and pharmacy 65.4%. There was a low acceptability of sport venues as pick-up points in men as a whole (11.7%), but this was greater among those who participated in sport (53.9%). Conclusions Healthcare settings were the most acceptable places for accessing STI and HIV self-testing kits. Although young men frequently access general practice, currently little STI screening occurs in this setting. There is considerable potential to screen large numbers of men and find high rates of infection through screening in general practice. While non-clinical settings are acceptable to a minority of men, more research is needed to understand how these venues could be used most effectively.

The eSexual Health Clinic system for management, prevention, and control of sexually transmitted infections: exploratory studies in people testing for Chlamydia trachomatis

BACKGROUND Self-directed and internet-based care are key elements of eHealth agendas. We developed a complex online clinical and public health intervention, the eSexual Health Clinic (eSHC), in which patients with genital chlamydia are diagnosed and medically managed via an automated online clinical consultation, leading to antibiotic collection from a pharmacy. Partner notification, health promotion, and capture of surveillance data are integral aspects of the eSHC. We aimed to assess the safety and feasibility of the eSHC as an alternative to routine care in non-randomised, exploratory proof-of-concept studies. METHODS Participants were untreated patients with chlamydia from genitourinary medicine clinics, untreated patients with chlamydia from six areas in England in the National Chlamydia Screening Programmes (NCSP) online postal testing service, or patients without chlamydia tested in the same six NCSP areas. All participants were aged 16 years or older. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with chlamydia who consented to the online chlamydia pathway who then received appropriate clinical management either exclusively through online treatment or via a combination of online management and face-to-face care. We captured adverse treatment outcomes. FINDINGS Between July 21, 2014, and March 13, 2015, 2340 people used the eSHC. Of 197 eligible patients from genitourinary medicine clinics, 161 accessed results online. Of the 116 who consented to be included in the study, 112 (97%, 95% CI 91-99) received treatment, and 74 of those were treated exclusively online. Of the 146 eligible NCSP patients, 134 accessed their results online, and 105 consented to be included. 93 (89%, 95% CI 81-94) received treatment, and 60 were treated exclusively online. In both groups, median time to collection of treatment was within 1 day of receiving their diagnosis. 1776 (89%) of 1936 NCSP patients without chlamydia accessed results online. No adverse events were recorded. INTERPRETATION The eSHC is safe and feasible for management of patients with chlamydia, with preliminary evidence of similar treatment outcomes to those in traditional services. This innovative model could help to address growing clinical and public health needs. A definitive trial is needed to assess the efficacy, cost-effectiveness, and public health impact of this intervention. FUNDING UK Clinical Research Collaboration.

Developing and testing accelerated partner therapy for partner notification for people with genital Chlamydia trachomatis diagnosed in primary care: a pilot randomised controlled trial

Background Accelerated partner therapy (APT) is a promising partner notification (PN) intervention in specialist sexual health clinic attenders. To address its applicability in primary care, we undertook a pilot randomised controlled trial (RCT) of two APT models in community settings. Methods Three-arm pilot RCT of two adjunct APT interventions: APTHotline (telephone assessment of partner(s) plus standard PN) and APTPharmacy (community pharmacist assessment of partner(s) plus routine PN), versus standard PN alone (patient referral). Index patients were women diagnosed with genital chlamydia in 12 general practices and three community contraception and sexual health (CASH) services in London and south coast of England, randomised between 1 September 2011 and 31 July 2013. Results 199 women described 339 male partners, of whom 313 were reported by the index as contactable. The proportions of contactable partners considered treated within 6 weeks of index diagnosis were APTHotline 39/111 (35%), APTPharmacy 46/100 (46%), standard patient referral 46/102 (45%). Among treated partners, 8/39 (21%) in APTHotline arm were treated via hotline and 14/46 (30%) in APTPharmacy arm were treated via pharmacy. Conclusions The two novel primary care APT models were acceptable, feasible, compliant with regulations and capable of achieving acceptable outcomes within a pilot RCT but intervention uptake was low. Although addition of these interventions to standard PN did not result in a difference between arms, overall PN uptake was higher than previously reported in similar settings, probably as a result of introducing a formal evaluation. Recruitment to an individually randomised trial proved challenging and full evaluation will likely require service-level randomisation. Trial registration number Registered UK Clinical Research Network Study Portfolio id number 10123.

How and why do South Asians attend GUM clinics? Evidence from contrasting GUM clinics across England.

Background Improving access to sexual healthcare is a priority in the UK, especially for ethnic minorities. Though South Asians in the UK report low levels of sexual ill health, few data exist regarding their use of genitourinary medicine (GUM) services. Objectives To describe reasons for attendance at GUM clinics among individuals of South Asian origin relative to patients of other ethnicities. Methods 4600 new attendees (5% South Asian; n=226) at seven sociodemographically and geographically contrasting GUM clinics across England completed a questionnaire between October 2004 and March 2005, which were linked to routine clinical data. Results South Asians were more likely than other groups to be signposted to the GUM clinic by another health service—for example, in women 14% versus 8% respectively (p=0.005) reported doing so from a family planning clinic. These women also reported that they would be less likely to go to the clinic if their symptoms resolved spontaneously compared with other women (51% vs 31%, p=0.024). However, relative to other clinic attendees, no differences in the proportions of South Asians who had acute STI(s) diagnosed at clinic were noted. Furthermore, South Asian men were more likely to report as their reason for attendance that they wanted an HIV test (23.4% vs 14.8%, p=0.005). Conclusion Despite having similar STI care needs to attendees from other ethnic groups, South Asians, especially women, may be reluctant to seek care from GUM clinics, especially if their symptoms resolve. Sexual health services need to develop locally-delivered and culturally-appropriate initiatives to improve care pathways.

Young people’s perceptions of smartphone-enabled self-testing and online care for sexually transmitted infections: qualitative interview study

BackgroundControl of sexually transmitted infections (STI) is a global public health priority. Despite the UK’s free, confidential sexual health clinical services, those at greatest risk of STIs, including young people, report barriers to use. These include: embarrassment regarding face-to-face consultations; the time-commitment needed to attend clinic; privacy concerns (e.g. being seen attending clinic); and issues related to confidentiality.A smartphone-enabled STI self-testing device, linked with online clinical care pathways for treatment, partner notification, and disease surveillance, is being developed by the eSTI2 consortium. It is intended to benefit public health, and could do so by increasing testing among populations which underutilise existing services and/or by enabling rapid provision of effective treatment. We explored its acceptability among potential users.MethodsIn-depth interviews were conducted in 2012 with 25 sexually-experienced 16–24 year olds, recruited from Further Education colleges in an urban, high STI prevalence area. Thematic analysis was undertaken.ResultsNine females and 16 males participated. 21 self-defined as Black; three, mixed ethnicity; and one, Muslim/Asian. 22 reported experience of STI testing, two reported previous STI diagnoses, and all had owned smartphones.Participants expressed enthusiasm about the proposed service, and suggested that they and their peers would use it and test more often if it were available. Utilizing sexual healthcare was perceived to be easier and faster with STI self-testing and online clinical care, which facilitated concealment of STI testing from peers/family, and avoided embarrassing face-to-face consultations. Despite these perceived advantages to privacy, new privacy concerns arose regarding communications technology: principally the risk inherent in having evidence of STI testing or diagnosis visible or retrievable on their phone. Some concerns arose regarding the proposed self-test’s accuracy, related to self-operation and the technology’s novelty. Several expressed anxiety around the possibility of being diagnosed and treated without any contact with healthcare professionals.ConclusionsRemote STI self-testing and online care appealed to these young people. It addressed barriers they associated with conventional STI services, thus may benefit public health through earlier detection and treatment. Our findings underpin development of online care pathways, as part of ongoing research to create this complex e-health intervention.

Is Accelerated Partner Therapy partner notification for sexually transmissible infections acceptable and feasible in general practice

BACKGROUND Partner notification in primary care is problematic and of limited effectiveness despite enthusiasm from primary care providers to engage with sexually transmissible infection (STI) management. Innovative partner notification strategies must be relevant to the primary care context. The aim of the present study was to explore the opinions of general practitioners (GP) and practice nurses on the acceptability and feasibility of a new form of partner notification developed in the specialist setting known as Accelerated Partner Therapy (APT), for sex partners of those diagnosed with a bacterial STI in general practice. APT is defined as partner notification strategies that reduce time for sex partners to be treated, and include partner assessment by appropriately qualified health care professionals and here involve telephone and community pharmacy assessment. METHODS Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of GP and practice nurses in East London, UK. RESULTS All participants appreciated the importance of partner notification in STI management and felt that APT would improve their practice. They supported prioritising antibiotic provision for the sex partners with provision for future comprehensive STI screening. Although both models were acceptable and feasible, the majority preferred the sexual health clinic telephone assessment over the pharmacy model. CONCLUSIONS GP and practice nurses welcome new strategies for partner notification and believe APT could provide rapid and convenient treatment of sex partners in general practice. This supports further evaluation of APT models as a partner notification strategy in primary care.

The SPORTSMART study: a pilot randomised controlled trial of sexually transmitted infection screening interventions targeting men in football club settings

Background Uptake of chlamydia screening by men in England has been substantially lower than by women. Non-traditional settings such as sports clubs offer opportunities to widen access. Involving people who are not medically trained to promote screening could optimise acceptability. Methods We developed two interventions to explore the acceptability and feasibility of urine-based sexually transmitted infection (STI) screening interventions targeting men in football clubs. We tested these interventions in a pilot cluster randomised control trial. Six clubs were randomly allocated, two to each of three trial arms: team captain-led and poster STI screening promotion; sexual health adviser-led and poster STI screening promotion; and poster-only STI screening promotion (control/comparator). Primary outcome was test uptake. Results Across the three arms, 153 men participated in the trial and 90 accepted the offer of screening (59%, 95% CI 35% to 79%). Acceptance rates were broadly comparable across the arms: captain-led: 28/56 (50%); health professional-led: 31/46 (67%); and control: 31/51 (61%). However, rates varied appreciably by club, precluding formal comparison of arms. No infections were identified. Process evaluation confirmed that interventions were delivered in a standardised way but the control arm was unintentionally ‘enhanced’ by some team captains actively publicising screening events. Conclusions Compared with other UK-based community screening models, uptake was high but gaining access to clubs was not always easy. Use of sexual health advisers and team captains to promote screening did not appear to confer additional benefit over a poster-promoted approach. Although the interventions show potential, the broader implications of this strategy for UK male STI screening policy require further investigation.