Search

Objectives We established a subcohort of HIV-positive individuals from 10 sexual health clinics within the Australian HIV Observational Database (AHOD). The aim of this study was to assess demographic and other factors that might be associated with an incident sexually transmitted infection (STI). Methods The cohort follow-up was from March 2010 to March 2013, and included patients screened at least once for an STI. We used survival methods to determine time to first new and confirmed incident STI infection (chlamydia, gonorrhoea, syphilis or genital warts). Factors evaluated included sex, age, mode of HIV exposure, year of AHOD enrolment, hepatitis B or C coinfection, time-updated CD4 cell count, time-updated HIV RNA viral load, and prior STI diagnosis. Results There were 110 first incident STI diagnoses observed over 1015 person-years of follow-up, a crude rate of 10.8 [95% confidence interval (CI) 9.0-13.0] per 100 person-years. Factors independently associated with increased risk of incident STI included younger age [≥ 50 vs. 30-39 years old, adjusted hazards ratio (aHR) 0.4; 95% CI 0.2-0.8; P < 0.0001]; prior STI infection (aHR 2.5; 95% CI 1.6-3.8; P < 0.001), and heterosexual vs. men who have sex with men (MSM) as the likely route of exposure (aHR 0.2; 95% CI 0.1-0.6; P < 0.001). Conclusions In this cohort of individualsbeing treated with antiretroviral drugs, those who were MSM, who were 30-39 years old, and who had a prior history of STI, were at highest risk of a further STI diagnosis.

Background: In HIV-positive people, sexually transmissible infections (STIs) probably increase the infectiousness of HIV. Methods: In 2010, we established a cohort of individuals (n = 554) from clinics in the Australian HIV Observational Database (AHOD). We calculated retrospective rates for four STIs for 2005-10 and prospective incidence rates for 2010-11. Results: At baseline (2010), patient characteristics were similar to the rest of AHOD. Overall incidence was 12.5 per 100 person-years. Chlamydial infections increased from 3.4 per 100 person-years (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.9-5.7) in 2005 to 6.7 per 100 person-years (95% CI: 4.5-9.5) in 2011, peaking in 2010 (8.1 per 100 person-years; 95% CI: 5.6-11.2). Cases were distributed among rectal (61.9%), urethral (34%) and pharyngeal (6.3%) sites. Gonococcal infections increased, peaking in 2010 (4.7 per 100 person-years; 95% CI: 5.6-11.2; Ptrend = 0.0099), distributed among rectal (63.9%), urethral (27.9%) and pharyngeal (14.8%) sites. Syphilis showed several peaks, the largest in 2008 (5.3 per 100 person-years; 95% CI: 3.3-8.0); the overall trend was not significant (P = 0.113). Genital warts declined from 7.5 per 100 person-years (95% CI: 4.8-11.3) in 2005 to 2.4 per 100 person-years (95% CI: 1.1-4.5) in 2011 (Ptrend = 0.0016). Conclusions: For chlamydial and gonococcal infections, incidence was higher than previous Australian estimates among HIV-infected men who have sex with men, increasing during 2005-2011. Rectal infections outnumbered infections at other sites. Syphilis incidence remained high but did not increase; that of genital warts was lower and decreased.

Objective: To describe the partner notification experiences of individuals diagnosed with chlamydia and to determine what supports might best assist them. Goal: To determine what supports might best assist chlamydia infected individuals to notify their partners. Study Design: A telephone survey was undertaken with men and women recently diagnosed with chlamydia across 3 Australian jurisdictions between August 2007 and January 2008. Results: Of the 286 individuals who agreed to be contacted about the study, 202 (71%) completed the survey. Twenty-three percent (333/1458) of recent partners were notified: men who had sex with men (MSM) notified 15% (133/880) of their partners, heterosexual men 31% (114/370), and women 46% (86/188) of their partners (P < 0.001). Overall, 84% (169/202) of individuals notified at least one partner. The main reasons for informing partners were out of concern for them (44%) or because it was considered "the right thing to do" (37%). The preferred methods for contacting partners were telephone (52%) and face-to-face (30%). Email (8%) and short message service (SMS) (11%) were less commonly used; however, if offered a website with anonymous email and SMS services, nearly half of individuals indicated they would find this useful. Of those who had not informed all partners with known contact details (n = 94), 34% reported that if web-based tools were available they would have contacted more partners. Over half of participants would like to have been given antibiotics to give to their partner. Conclusion: The availability of tailored resources may assist in improving partner notification for chlamydia.

Background: Partner notification for patients diagnosed with chlamydia is a strategy recommended to interrupt transmission of infection, and patients are commonly encouraged by health practitioners to contact their sexual partners themselves. Few studies, however, have ascertained the psychosocial impact of the chlamydia diagnosis and its effect on partner notification. Methods: In-depth telephone interviews were conducted with 25 women and 15 men aged 18-55 years, diagnosed with chlamydia from clinics in Victoria, Australian Capital Territory and Queensland. Reactions to chlamydia diagnosis, as well as reasons for, and feelings about, telling their sexual partners about this infection were explored. Results: Common reactions to initial diagnosis were surprise, shock and shame. The majority of both men and women saw partner notification as a social duty. Some cited concerns about their own health and the health of others as a reason for telling partners and ex-partners about the diagnosis. An infrequent reason offered for partner notification was to confront a partner to clarify fidelity. Reasons for not contacting a partner were typically fear of reaction or a lack of contact details. Although participants reported sexual partners exhibiting a variety of reactions when told of the diagnosis, results showed that for almost everyone, the experience of notifying their partner was better than they had expected. Conclusions: Findings suggested that partner notification by people diagnosed with chlamydia is achievable but that many require support from their health practitioner to achieve the skills and confidence necessary during this difficult time.

BACKGROUND Partner notification is accepted as a vital component in the control of chlamydia. However, in reality, many sexual partners of individuals diagnosed with chlamydia are never informed of their risk. The newer technologies of email and SMS have been used as a means of improving partner notification rates. This study explored the use and acceptability of different partner notification methods to help inform the development of strategies and resources to increase the number of partners notified. METHODS Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with 40 people who were recently diagnosed with chlamydia from three sexual health centres and two general practices across three Australian jurisdictions. RESULTS Most participants chose to contact their partners either in person (56%) or by phone (44%). Only 17% chose email or SMS. Participants viewed face-to-face as the "gold standard" in partner notification because it demonstrated caring, respect and courage. Telephone contact, while considered insensitive by some, was often valued because it was quick, convenient and less confronting. Email was often seen as less personal while SMS was generally considered the least acceptable method for telling partners. There was also concern that emails and SMS could be misunderstood, not taken seriously or shown to others. Despite these, email and SMS were seen to be appropriate and useful in some circumstances. Letters, both from the patients or from their doctor, were viewed more favourably but were seldom used. CONCLUSION These findings suggest that many people diagnosed with chlamydia are reluctant to use the new technologies for partner notification, except in specific circumstances, and our efforts in developing partner notification resources may best be focused on giving patients the skills and confidence for personal interaction.

BACKGROUND Genital chlamydia is the most commonly notified sexually transmissible infection (STI) in Australia and worldwide and can have serious reproductive health outcomes. Partner notification, testing and treatment are important facets of chlamydia control. Traditional methods of partner notification are not reaching enough partners to effectively control transmission of chlamydia. Patient-delivered partner therapy (PDPT) has been shown to improve the treatment of sexual partners. In Australia, General Practitioners (GPs) are responsible for the bulk of chlamydia testing, diagnosis, treatment and follow up. This study aimed to determine the views and practices of Australian general practitioners (GPs) in relation to partner notification and PDPT for chlamydia and explored GPs' perceptions of their patients' barriers to notifying partners of a chlamydia diagnosis. METHODS In-depth, semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with 40 general practitioners (GPs) from rural, regional and urban Australia from November 2006 to March 2007. Topics covered: GPs' current practice and views about partner notification, perceived barriers and useful supports, previous use of and views regarding PDPT.Transcripts were imported into NVivo7 and subjected to thematic analysis. Data saturation was reached after 32 interviews had been completed. RESULTS Perceived barriers to patients telling partners (patient referral) included: stigma; age and cultural background; casual or long-term relationship, ongoing relationship or not. Barriers to GPs undertaking partner notification (provider referral) included: lack of time and staff; lack of contact details; uncertainty about the legality of contacting partners and whether this constitutes breach of patient confidentiality; and feeling both personally uncomfortable and inadequately trained to contact someone who is not their patient. GPs were divided on the use of PDPT--many felt concerned that it is not best clinical practice b

Objective: To examine practices of general practitioners' (GPs) in relation to partner notification for chlamydia and identify the supports they would find most useful to assist them. GOAL: To identify innovative resources that could improve partner notification for chlamydia in primary care. Study design: A postal survey was undertaken that involved GPs from several jurisdictions across Australia between August and December 2007. GPs were randomly selected from a national database. Results: Of 521 eligible GPs, 234 (45%) returned a completed questionnaire. Ninety-five percent (n = 223) felt that it was their role to discuss partner notification with patients diagnosed with chlamydia; however, only 45% (105/232) were sure how best to assist their patients with this. Considerable variation was shown in the way partner notification was undertaken, including how far back in time GPs recommended contacting partners. GPs considered a wide range of possible resources useful, including a website supporting patients (90%), information sheets generated by practice software when chlamydia is diagnosed (90%), printed information packs for patients (85%), a website designed to assist GPs (80%), and referral to these websites via positive laboratory results (85%). Forty-three percent currently undertook patient delivered partner therapy for chlamydia. Conclusion: GPs want and need greater guidance and resources to assist them with partner notification for chlamydia. Resources utilizing the internet and practice software and mechanisms where GPs are automatically directed to these when chlamydia is diagnosed have wide appeal and the potential to improve the effectiveness of partner notification for chlamydia.

Theology News & Notes was a theological journal published for Fuller Theological Seminary alumni/ae from 1954 through 2014. The digital scans of Theology News & Notes were made possible by Fuller Studio and the Fuller Seminary Archives.