Cultural advice

The Australian National University acknowledges, celebrates and pays our respects to the Ngunnawal and Ngambri people of the Canberra region and to all First Nations Australians on whose traditional lands we meet and work, and whose cultures are among the oldest continuing cultures in human history.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are advised that ANU Library collections may include images, names, voices, and other representations of deceased persons.

Material in the collection may contain terms, language or views that reflect the period in which the item was created and may be considered inappropriate today.

What needs to change to increase chlamydia screening in general practice in Australia? The views of general practitioners

dc.contributor.authorHocking, Jane S
dc.contributor.authorParker, Rhian
dc.contributor.authorPavlin, Natasha
dc.contributor.authorFairley, Christopher K
dc.contributor.authorGunn, Jane
dc.date.accessioned2010-09-16T04:47:45Zen_US
dc.date.accessioned2010-12-20T06:02:37Z
dc.date.available2010-09-16T04:47:45Zen_US
dc.date.available2010-12-20T06:02:37Z
dc.date.issued2008-12-30en_US
dc.date.updated2016-02-24T10:20:57Z
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND: Australia is considering implementing a chlamydia screening program in general practice. The views of general practitioners (GPs) are necessary to inform the design of the program. This paper aimed to investigate Australian GPs' views on how chlamydia screening could work in the Australian context. METHODS: This project used both qualitative interviews and a quantitative questionnaire. GPs were randomly selected from a national database of medical practitioners for both the qualitative and quantitative components. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with GPs and a thematic analysis conducted. The results of the interviews were used to design a quantitative postal questionnaire for completion by a larger sample of GPs. Up to three reminders were sent to nonresponders. RESULTS: Twenty one GPs completed an interview and 255 completed the postal questionnaire. The results of the postal survey were in strong concordance with those of the interview. GPs identified a number of barriers to increased screening including lack of time, knowledge of GPs and the public about chlamydia, patient embarrassment and support for partner notification. GPs felt strongly that screening would be easier if there was a national program and if the public and GPs had a greater knowledge about chlamydia. Incentive payments and mechanisms for recall and reminders would facilitate screening. Greater support for contact tracing would be important if screening is to increase. CONCLUSION: Chlamydia screening in general practice is acceptable to Australian GPs. If screening is to succeed, policy makers must consider the facilitators identified by GPs.
dc.format8 pages
dc.identifier.citationBMC Public Health 8.245 (2008)
dc.identifier.issn1471-2458en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10440/1099en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://digitalcollections.anu.edu.au/handle/10440/1099
dc.publisherBioMed Central Ltd
dc.rights© 2008 Hocking et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
dc.sourceBMC Public Health
dc.source.urihttp://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1471-2458-8-425.pdfen_US
dc.source.urihttp://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/8/425en_US
dc.subjectKeywords: adult; article; Australia; Chlamydia trachomatis; chlamydiasis; clinical practice; contact examination; economics; epidemiology; female; general practice; general practitioner; health personnel attitude; human; interview; isolation and purification; male;
dc.titleWhat needs to change to increase chlamydia screening in general practice in Australia? The views of general practitioners
dc.typeJournal article
dcterms.dateAccepted2008-12-30en_US
local.bibliographicCitation.issue425
local.bibliographicCitation.startpage16
local.contributor.affiliationHocking, Jane S, University of Melbourne
local.contributor.affiliationParker, Rhian, College of Medicine, Biology and Environment, ANU
local.contributor.affiliationPavlin, Natasha, University of Melbourne
local.contributor.affiliationFairley, Christopher K, Melbourne Sexual Health Centre
local.contributor.affiliationGunn, Jane, University of Melbourne
local.contributor.authoruidE28456en_US
local.contributor.authoruidU4645469en_US
local.contributor.authoruidE40727en_US
local.contributor.authoruidE8530en_US
local.contributor.authoruidE40728en_US
local.identifier.absfor110309 (25%), 111717 (75%)en_US
local.identifier.ariespublicationu3961986xPUB29en_US
local.identifier.citationvolume8
local.identifier.doi10.1186/1471-2458-8-425
local.identifier.scopusID2-s2.0-58649096098
local.publisher.urlhttp://www.biomedcentral.com/en_US
local.type.statusPublished Versionen_US

Downloads

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Hocking_What2008.pdf
Size:
262.19 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
abcd