ABSTRACT
The primary outcome was to determine the acceptability of the Internet, specifically a website for use in standard partner notification. A secondary objective was to determine if a website would enhance the outcomes of currently used partner notification methods. In a randomized control trial, 105 participants diagnosed with chlamydia and non-gonoccocal urethritis (NGU) were randomized and 97 completed the study. About 30% of participants were provided a standard partner letter and 70% were provided the standard partner letter and website. All participants reported that their partners had no objections to the website (0%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0-5%). There were no complaints received from any partner. The odds ratio for contacting partners was not significantly different between the two groups of participants. The results of this study indicate that providing a website with specific information about the infection to which a partner has been exposed is not harmful.
Subject(s)
Contact Tracing/methods , Correspondence as Topic , Internet , Adolescent , Adult , Chlamydia Infections/diagnosis , Humans , Middle Aged , Sexual Partners , Urethritis/diagnosisABSTRACT
Partner notification is crucial to the effective control of sexually transmissible infections (STIs) and has not changed substantially over recent years. New technology for communication has been rapidly adopted in our communities but little work has been carried out about its role in contact tracing. Text messaging, emails and the Internet could be useful tools for both provider and patient referral but considerable ethical considerations are involved. Technology is available to help protect the basic tenets of confidentiality and privacy but more thorough exploration of these methods is required to establish efficacy and appropriateness in contact tracing. This research is important if we are to procure an evidence base for future contact tracing strategies rather than allowing these methods to become commonplace at the initiation of our clients.
Subject(s)
Contact Tracing/methods , Sexual Partners , Sexually Transmitted Diseases/transmission , Cell Phone , Confidentiality , Electronic Mail , Humans , Internet , Male , Sexually Transmitted Diseases/prevention & controlABSTRACT
This audit was carried out in August 2003 and examined HIV notification data in Victoria. We aimed to determine the proportion of partners reported as being traced from newly diagnosed HIV individuals, the type of contact tracing used and identify the number of HIV cases newly diagnosed from contact tracing. We compared men who have sex with men (MSM) with all other newly diagnosed HIV individuals in Victoria (non-MSM). Of the 215 newly diagnosed HIV-positive individuals, 49% (n = 105) could potentially carry out contact tracing. There was a difference between MSM and non-MSM in the proportion of contactable partners (44% vs 63% respectively, P = 0.017). MSM less commonly used provider referral than non-MSM (12% vs 53% respectively, P < 0.001) but more commonly used patient referral (41% MSM vs 9% non-MSM, P = 0.001). Of the 13 individuals found to be HIV-positive through contact tracing, nine (69%) were non-MSM.
Subject(s)
Contact Tracing/statistics & numerical data , Delivery of Health Care/standards , HIV Infections/prevention & control , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Child , Child, Preschool , Female , HIV Infections/epidemiology , Humans , Male , Medical Audit , Middle Aged , Victoria/epidemiologyABSTRACT
This study was conducted to determine the estimated proportion of contactable sexual partners, the most common types of contact information available and the most acceptable contact tracing strategies for our clients. Five hundred 'walk in' clients completed a questionnaire about their total number of sexual partners, the proportion of contactable partners and available contact information. Women had the highest estimated number of contactable partners (89-94%), men who have sex with men had the lowest (51-73%). The preferred contact tracing strategy was to give partners a website address (76%) and the least preferred was provider referral (33%). There was a difference in the type of information available for contacting sexual partners (P <0.001); most commonly clients reported partners contactable by phone or face to face and least commonly through a third person. The currently used method (doctor's letter) is not the preferred choice of these clients and more innovative methods using recent technology may prove more effective.
