Interspace Encounters: Parkview Gardens

The undertaking to render an experience tangible reveals the inadequacy of the techniques and technologies of representation to transcribe the perception of ubiquitous, yet unnoticed, spaces in the urban environment. The work of Madeline Marak contemplates overlooked and forgotten spaces that are unnoticed by busy, preoccupied minds. The work advocates for slowing down… considering… and being present. This thesis refers to writer Rebecca Solnit and her anthologies on the subjects of walking, wandering, and getting lost to advocate for activities that preoccupy the mind and facilitate freethinking. The humanist geographer Yi-Fu Tuan is quoted in argument for a direct engagement with a space. Marak’s work mirrors the desire to express the felt experience of being in a space that is neither fully human-constructed nor fully natural, negotiating the margin between what we experience and what we think to know of a space. The theorists Georges Perec and John Berger, as well as the artist Uta Barth, are referenced to expound on the act of seeing; contemplating what we look at and how we see. Marak uses the mediums of photography and painting to investigate a perceptive experience. Artist Richard Diebenkorn and collaboration Peter Fischli and David Weiss work similarly to Marak by translating the experience of a place into images. Ultimately, the representations function separately from the experience in that they cultivate patience and consider the banality of everydayness to affirm the practice of noticing the unnoticed

Partner notification outcomes after integration of an on-site disease intervention specialist at a sexually transmitted disease clinic.

Partner notification services (PNS) are highly effective in reducing transmission of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs). We assessed outcomes of PNS before and after integration of an on-site disease intervention specialist (DIS) at a publicly-funded STD clinic.From August 2014 to December 2015, patients testing positive for infectious syphilis or gonorrhea at the Rhode Island STD Clinic were referred to on-site DIS for partner notification. Data on PNS outcomes were reviewed for eight months before integration of DIS at the clinic and compared to eight months after.Of the 145 index patients referred for PNS during the study period (n = 58 before DIS integration, n = 87 after), 86% were interviewed. DIS integration resulted in a significantly greater proportion of index patients interviewed overall (92% versus 76%, p<0.01), on the day of diagnosis (85% versus 61%; p<0.01), and in person at the STD clinic (64% versus 11%; p<0.01). However, there was no significant difference in number of sexual partners named or treated.Integrating DIS at a publicly-funded STD clinic resulted in a greater number of index cases interviewed, a greater number interviewed in person, and a greater number interviewed on the day of diagnosis. Challenges remain in identifying and engaging partners for treatment

Public health opportunities and challenges in the provision of partner notification services: the New England experience

Abstract Background Partner notification services (PNS) are recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention as a public health intervention for addressing the spread of HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases (STDs). Barriers and facilitators to the partner notification process from a public health perspective have not been well described. Methods In 2015, a coalition of New England public health STD directors and investigators formed to address the increasing STD prevalence across the region (Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont) and to promote communication between state STD programs. To evaluate barriers and facilitators of PNS programs, a survey was administered to representatives from each state to describe PNS processes and approaches. Results Of the six PNS programs, Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, Vermont, and New Hampshire had combined HIV and STD PNS programs; Rhode Island’s programs were integrated but employed separate disease intervention specialists (DIS). All states performed PNS for HIV and syphilis. Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont performed services for all gonorrhea cases. Rhode Island, Connecticut, and Massachusetts performed limited partner notification for gonorrhea due to lack of resources. None of the six states routinely provided services for chlamydia, though Maine and Vermont did so for high-priority populations such as HIV co-infected or pregnant individuals. Across all programs, clients received risk reduction counseling and general STD education as a component of PNS, in addition to referrals for HIV/STD care at locations ranging from Planned Parenthood to community- or hospital-based clinics. Notable barriers to successful partner notification across all states included anonymous partners and index cases who did not feel comfortable sharing partners’ names with DIS. Other common barriers included insufficient staff, inability of DIS to identify and contact partners, and index cases declining to speak with DIS staff. Conclusions In New England, state health departments use different strategies to implement PNS programs and referral to STD care. Despite this, similar challenges exist across settings, including difficulty with anonymous partners and limited state resources

Characteristics of index patients before and after implementation of an on-site DIS at an STD clinic.

<p>Characteristics of index patients before and after implementation of an on-site DIS at an STD clinic.</p

Partner notification outcomes before and after implementation of an on-site DIS at an STD clinic.

<p>Partner notification outcomes before and after implementation of an on-site DIS at an STD clinic.</p