University General - Research Publications
Permanent URI for this collection
Search Results
1 - 4 of 4
-
ItemIncentive payments to general practitioners aimed at increasing opportunistic testing of young women for chlamydia: a pilot cluster randomised controlled trial(BIOMED CENTRAL LTD, 2010-02-17)BACKGROUND: Financial incentives have been used for many years internationally to improve quality of care in general practice. The aim of this pilot study was to determine if offering general practitioners (GP) a small incentive payment per test would increase chlamydia testing in women aged 16 to 24 years, attending general practice. METHODS: General practice clinics (n = 12) across Victoria, Australia, were cluster randomized to receive either a $AUD5 payment per chlamydia test or no payment for testing 16 to 24 year old women for chlamydia. Data were collected on the number of chlamydia tests and patient consultations undertaken by each GP over two time periods: 12 month pre-trial and 6 month trial period. The impact of the intervention was assessed using a mixed effects logistic regression model, accommodating for clustering at GP level. RESULTS: Testing increased from 6.2% (95% CI: 4.2, 8.4) to 8.8% (95% CI: 4.8, 13.0) (p = 0.1) in the control group and from 11.5% (95% CI: 4.6, 18.5) to 13.4% (95% CI: 9.5, 17.5) (p = 0.4) in the intervention group. Overall, the intervention did not result in a significant increase in chlamydia testing in general practice. The odds ratio for an increase in testing in the intervention group compared to the control group was 0.9 (95% CI: 0.6, 1.2). Major barriers to increased chlamydia testing reported by GPs included a lack of time, difficulty in remembering to offer testing and a lack of patient awareness around testing. CONCLUSIONS: A small financial incentive alone did not increase chlamydia testing among young women attending general practice. It is possible small incentive payments in conjunction with reminder and feedback systems may be effective, as may higher financial incentive payments. Further research is required to determine if financial incentives can increase testing in Australian general practice, the type and level of financial scheme required and whether incentives needs to be part of a multi-faceted package. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry ACTRN12608000499381.
-
ItemFactors Associated with Participation and Attrition in a Longitudinal Study of Bacterial Vaginosis in Australian Women Who Have Sex with Women(PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE, 2014-11-20)OBJECTIVE: A number of social and sexual risk factors for bacterial vaginosis (BV) have been described. It is important to understand whether these factors are associated with non-participation or attrition of participants from longitudinal studies in order to examine potential for recruitment or attrition bias. We describe factors associated with participation and attrition in a 24-month prospective cohort study, investigating incident BV among Australian women who have sex with women. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Participants negative for prevalent BV were offered enrolment in a longitudinal cohort study. Participants self-collected vaginal samples and completed questionnaires 3-monthly to endpoint (BV-positive/BV-negative by 24 months). Factors associated with participation in the cohort study were examined by logistic regression and factors associated with attrition from the cohort were examined by Cox regression. RESULTS: The cross-sectional study recruited 457 women. 334 BV-negative women were eligible for the cohort and 298 (89%, 95%CI 85, 92) enrolled. Lower educational levels (aOR 2.72, 95%CI 1.09, 6.83), smoking (aOR 2.44, 95%CI 1.13, 5.27), past BV symptoms (aOR 3.42, 95%CI 1.16, 10.10) and prior genital warts (aOR 2.71, 95%CI 1.14, 6.46) were associated with non-participation; a partner co-enrolling increased participation (aOR 3.73, 95%CI 1.43, 9.70). 248 participants (83%, 95%CI 78, 87) were retained to study endpoint (BV-negative at 24 months or BV-positive at any stage). Attrition was associated being <30 yrs (aHR 2.15, 95%CI 1.13, 4.10) and a male partner at enrolment (aHR 6.12, 95%CI 1.99, 18.82). CONCLUSION: We achieved high participation and retention levels in a prospective cohort study and report factors influencing participation and retention of participants over a 24-month study period, which will assist in the design and implementation of future cohort studies in sexual health and disease.
-
ItemYoung pregnant women's views on the acceptability of screening for chlamydia as part of routine antenatal care(BMC, 2010-08-19)BACKGROUND: In pregnancy, untreated chlamydia infection has been associated with adverse outcomes for both mother and infant. Like most women, pregnant women infected with chlamydia do not report genital symptoms, and are therefore unlikely to be aware of their infection. The aim of this study was to determine the acceptability of screening pregnant women aged 16-25 years for chlamydia as part of routine antenatal care. METHODS: As part of a larger prospective, cross-sectional study of pregnant women aged 16-25 years attending antenatal services across Melbourne, Australia, 100 women were invited to participate in a face-to-face, semi structured interview on the acceptability of screening for chlamydia during pregnancy. Women infected with chlamydia were oversampled (n = 31). RESULTS: Women had low levels of awareness of chlamydia before the test, retained relatively little knowledge after the test and commonly had misconceptions around chlamydia transmission, testing and sequelae. Women indicated a high level of acceptance and support for chlamydia screening, expressing their willingness to undertake whatever care was necessary to ensure the health of their baby. There was a strong preference for urine testing over other methods of specimen collection. Women questioned why testing was not already conducted alongside other antenatal STI screening tests, particularly in view of the risks chlamydia poses to the baby. Women who tested positive for chlamydia had mixed reactions, however, most felt relief and gratitude at having had chlamydia detected and reported high levels of partner support. CONCLUSIONS: Chlamydia screening as part of routine antenatal care was considered highly acceptable among young pregnant women who recognized the benefits of screening and strongly supported its implementation as part of routine antenatal care. The acceptability of screening is important to the uptake of chlamydia screening in future antenatal screening strategies.
-
ItemThe experience of providing young people attending general practice with an online risk assessment tool to assess their own sexual health risk(BIOMED CENTRAL LTD, 2009-03-12)BACKGROUND: Targeted chlamydia screening has been advocated to reduce chlamydia associated reproductive sequelae. General practitioners are well positioned to play a major role in chlamydia control. The primary aim of this pilot study was to measure the effect of offering an online sexual health assessment tool, Youth Check Your Risk, on chlamydia testing rates among young people attending general practices. The secondary aim was to test the acceptability of the tool among general practitioners and young people. METHODS: General practitioners at three practices in Melbourne, Australia, referred patients aged 16 to 24 years to Youth Check Your Risk http://www.checkyourrisk.org.au for use post-consultation between March to October 2007. The proportion of young people tested for chlamydia before and during the implementation of the tool was compared. Acceptability was assessed through a structured interviewer-administered questionnaire with general practitioners, and anonymous online data provided by Youth Check Your Risk users. RESULTS: The intervention did not result in any significant increases in the proportion of 16 to 24 year old males (2.7% to 3.0%) or females (6.3% to 6.4%) tested for chlamydia. A small increase in the proportion of 16 to 19 year old females tested was seen (4.1% to 7.2%). Of the 2997 patients seen during the intervention phase, 871 (29.1%) were referred to Youth Check Your Risk and 120 used it (13.8%). Major reasons for low referral rates reported by practitioners included lack of time, discomfort with raising the issue of testing, and difficulty in remembering to refer patients. CONCLUSION: Offering an online sexual risk assessment tool in general practice did not significantly increase the proportion of young people tested for chlamydia, with GPs identifying a number of barriers to referring young people to Youth Check Your Risk. Future interventions aimed at increasing chlamydia screening in general practice with the aid of an online risk assessment tool need to identify and overcome barriers to testing.