Search

Background: Chlamydia trachomatis is one of the most frequently reported sexually transmitted infections (STI) in Australia, the UK and Europe. Yet, rates of screening for STIs remain low, especially in younger adults. Objective: To assess effectiveness of Chlamydia screening interventions targeting young adults in community‐based settings, describe strategies utilized and assess them according to social marketing benchmark criteria. Search strategy: A systematic review of relevant literature between 2002 and 2012 in Medline, Web of Knowledge, PubMed, Scopus and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health was undertaken. Results: Of 18 interventions identified, quality of evidence was low. Proportional screening rates varied, ranging from: 30.9 to 62.5% in educational settings (n = 4), 4.8 to 63% in media settings (n = 6) and from 5.7 to 44.5% in other settings (n = 7). Assessment against benchmark criteria found that interventions incorporating social marketing principles were more likely to achieve positive results, yet few did this comprehensively. Most demonstrated customer orientation and addressed barriers to presenting to a clinic for screening. Only one addressed barriers to presenting for treatment after a positive result. Promotional messages typically focused on providing facts and accessing a testing kit. Risk assessment tools appeared to promote screening among higher risk groups. Few evaluated treatment rates following positive results; therefore, impact of screening on treatment rates remains unknown. Discussion: Future interventions should consider utilizing a comprehensive social marketing approach, using formative research to increase insight and segmentation and tailoring of screening interventions. Easy community access to both screening and treatment should be prioritized. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

sutcliffe k., caird j., kavanagh j., rees r., oliver k., dickson k., woodman j., barnett-paIge e. & thomas j. (2012) Comparing midwife-led and doctor-led maternity care: a systematic review of reviews. Journal of Advanced Nursing 68(11), 2376-2386. Abstract Aims. A report of a systematic review of reviews which examines the impact of having midwives-led maternity care for low-risk women, rather than physicians. Background. A rising birth rate, increasing complexity of births, and economic constraints pose difficulties for maternity services in the UK. Evidence about the most effective, cost-effective, and efficient ways to give maternity services is needed. Data sources. Searches were carried out in August-September 2009 of ten electronic databases, 16 key nursing and research websites, and reference lists of 56 relevant reviews. We also contacted 38 experts for information. No date restrictions were employed. Review methods. A narrative review of systematic reviews or 'meta review' was conducted using transparent and systematic procedures to limit bias at all stages. Systematic reviews that compared midwife-led care during pregnancy and birth with physician-led care were eligible for inclusion. Results. Three meta-analytic reviews were included. Midwife-led care for low-risk women was found to be better for a range of maternal outcomes, reduced the number of procedures in labour, and increased satisfaction with care. For some maternal, foetal, and neonatal outcomes reviews found no evidence that care led by midwives is different to that led by physicians. No adverse outcomes associated with midwife-led care were identified. Conclusions. For low-risk women, health and other benefits can result from having their maternity care led by midwives rather than physicians. Moreover, there appear to be no negative impacts on mothers and infants receiving midwife-led care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]