Chlamydia prevalence in young attenders of rural and regional primary care services in Australia: a cross-sectional survey.

OBJECTIVE To estimate chlamydia prevalence among 16-29-year-olds attending general practice clinics in Australia. DESIGN, PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING A cross-sectional survey was conducted from May 2010 to December 2012. Sexually experienced 16-29-year-olds were recruited from 134 general practice clinics in 54 rural and regional towns in four states and in nine metropolitan clinics (consecutive patients were invited to participate). Participants completed a questionnaire and were tested for chlamydia. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE Chlamydia prevalence. RESULTS Of 4284 participants, 197 tested positive for chlamydia (4.6%; 95% CI, 3.9%-5.3%). Prevalence was similar in men (5.2% [65/1257]; 95% CI, 3.9%-6.4%) and women (4.4% [132/3027]; 95% CI, 3.5%-5.2%) (P = 0.25) and high in those reporting genital symptoms or a partner with a sexually transmissible infection (STI) - 17.0% in men (8/47; 95% CI, 2.8%-31.2%); 9.5% in women (16/169; 95% CI, 5.1%-13.8%). Nearly three-quarters of cases (73.4% [130/177]) were diagnosed in asymptomatic patients attending for non-sexual health reasons, and 83.8% of all participants (3258/3890) had attended for non-sexual health reasons. Prevalence was slightly higher in participants from rural and regional areas (4.8% [179/3724]; 95% CI, 4.0%-5.6%) than those from metropolitan areas (3.1% [17/548]; 95% CI, 1.5%-4.7%) (P = 0.08). In multivariable analysis, increasing partner numbers in previous 12 months (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] for three or more partners, 5.11 [95% CI, 2.35-11.08]), chlamydia diagnosis in previous 12 months (AOR, 4.35 [95% CI, 1.52-12.41]) and inconsistent condom use with most recent partner (AOR, 2.90 [95% CI, 1.31-6.40]) were significantly associated with chlamydia in men. In women, increasing partner numbers in previous 12 months (AOR for two partners, 2.59 [95% CI, 1.59-4.23]; AOR for three or more partners, 3.58 [95% CI, 2.26-5.68]), chlamydia diagnosis in previous 12 months (AOR, 3.13 [95% CI, 1.62-6.06]) and age (AOR for 25-29-year-olds, 0.23 [95% CI, 0.12-0.44]) were associated with chlamydia. CONCLUSIONS Chlamydia prevalence is similar in young men and women attending general practice. Testing only those with genital symptoms or a partner with an STI would have missed three-quarters of cases. Most men and women are amenable to being tested in general practice, even in rural and regional areas

Do Australian general practitioners believe practice nurses can take a role in chlamydia testing? A qualitative study of attitudes and opinions

Background: Chlamydia notifications continue to rise in young people in many countries and regular chlamydia testing is an important prevention strategy. Although there have been initiatives to increase testing in primary care, none have specifically investigated the role of practice nurses (PNs) in maximising testing rates. PNs have previously expressed a willingness to be involved, but noted lack of support from general practitioners (GPs) as a barrier. We sought GPs' attitudes and opinions on PNs taking an expanded role in chlamydia testing and partner notification. Methods: In the context of a cluster randomised trial in mostly rural towns in 4 Australian states, semi structured interviews were conducted with 44 GPs between March 2011 and July 2012. Data relating to PN involvement in chlamydia testing were thematically analysed using a conventional content analysis approach. Results: The majority of GPs interviewed felt that a role for PNs in chlamydia testing was appropriate. GPs felt that PNs had more time for patient education and advice, that patients would find PNs easier to talk to and less intimidating than GPs, and that GPs themselves could benefit through a reduction in their workload. Although GPs felt that PNs could be utilised more effectively for preventative health activities such as chlamydia testing, many raised concerns about how these activities would be renumerated whilst some felt that existing workload pressures for PNs could make it difficult for them to expand their role. Whilst some rural GPs recognised that PNs might be well placed to conduct partner notification, they also recognised that issues of patient privacy and confidentiality related to living in a "small town" was also a concern. Conclusion: This is the first qualitative study to explore GPs' views around an increased role for PNs in chlamydia testing. Despite the concerns raised by PNs, these findings suggest that GPs support the concept and recognise that PNs are suited to the role. However issues raised, such as funding and remuneration may act as barriers that will need to be addressed before PNs are supported to make a contribution to increasing chlamydia testing rates in general practice

The chlamydia knowledge, awareness and testing practices of Australian general practitioners and practice nurses: survey findings from the Australian Chlamydia Control Effectiveness Pilot (ACCEPt)

BACKGROUND: ACCEPt, a large cluster randomized control trial, aims to determine if annual testing for 16 to 29 year olds in general practice can reduce chlamydia prevalence. ACCEPt is the first trial investigating the potential role of practice nurses (PN) in chlamydia testing. To inform the design of the ACCEPt intervention, we aimed to determine the chlamydia knowledge, attitudes, and testing practices of participating general practitioners (GPs) and PNs. METHODS: GPs and PNs from 143 clinics recruited from 52 areas in 4 Australian states were asked to complete a survey at time of recruitment. Responses of PNs and GPs were compared using conditional logistic regression to account for possible intra cluster correlation within clinics. RESULTS: Of the PNs and GPs enrolled in ACCEPt, 81% and 72% completed the questionnaire respectively. Less than a third of PNs (23%) and GPs (32%) correctly identified the two age groups with highest infection rates in women and only 16% vs 17% the correct age groups in men. More PNs than GPs would offer testing opportunistically to asymptomatic patients aged ≤25 years; women having a pap smear (84% vs 55%, P<0.01); antenatal checkup (83% vs 44%, P<0.01) and Aboriginal men with a sore throat (79% vs 33%, P<0.01), but also to patients outside of the guideline age group at the time of the survey; 26 year old males presenting for a medical check (78% vs 30%, P = <0.01) and 33 year old females presenting for a pill prescription (83% vs 55%, P<0.01). More PNs than GPs knew that retesting was recommended after chlamydia treatment (93% vs 87%, P=0.027); and the recommended timeframe was 3 months (66% vs 26%, P<0.01). A high proportion of PNs (90%) agreed that they could conduct chlamydia testing in general practice, with 79% wanting greater involvement and 89% further training. CONCLUSIONS: Our survey reveals gaps in chlamydia knowledge and management among GPs and PNs that may be contributing to low testing rates in general practice. The ACCEPt intervention is well targeted to address these and support clinicians in increasing testing rates. PNs could have a role in increasing chlamydia testing

\u27It opened my eyes\u27 - examining the impact of a multifaceted chlamydia testing intervention on general practitioners using normalization process theory

Background: Chlamydia is the most common notifiable sexually transmissible infection in Australia. Left untreated, it can develop into pelvic inflammatory disease and infertility. The majority of notifications come from general practice and it is ideally situated to test young Australians. Objectives: The Australian Chlamydia Control Effectiveness Pilot (ACCEPt) was a multifaceted intervention that aimed to reduce chlamydia prevalence by increasing testing in 16- to 29-year-olds attending general practice. GPs were interviewed to describe the effectiveness of the ACCEPt intervention in integrating chlamydia testing into routine practice using Normalization Process Theory (NPT). Methods: GPs were purposively selected based on age, gender, geographic location and size of practice at baseline and midpoint. Interview data were analysed regarding the intervention components and results were interpreted using NPT. Results: A total of 44 GPs at baseline and 24 at midpoint were interviewed. Most GPs reported offering a test based on age at midpoint versus offering a test based on symptoms or patient request at baseline. Quarterly feedback was the most significant ACCEPt component for facilitating a chlamydia test. Conclusions: The ACCEPt intervention has been able to moderately normalize chlamydia testing among GPs, although the components had varying levels of effectiveness. NPT can demonstrate the effective implementation of an intervention in general practice and has been valuable in understanding which components are essential and which components can be improved upon