Notificação de Parceiros – Caracterização da população e preferências de 100 doentes consecutivos da consulta de Venereologia de um hospital português

Alexandre Miroux-Catarino; João Borges-Costa

doi:10.29021/spdv.76.2.887

Alexandre Miroux-Catarino Médico Interno de Dermatovenereologia/Resident of Dermatology and Venereology, Serviço de Dermatologia, Centro Hospitalar de Lisboa Ocidental, Lisboa, Portugal http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8243-8724
João Borges-Costa Assistente Hospitalar de Dermatovenereologia / Consultant, Dermatology and Venereology, Centro Hospitalar Lisboa Norte; Professor Auxiliar Convidado de Dermatologia e Venereologia / Associated Professor, Dermatology and Venereology, Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de Lisboa; Professor Auxiliar Convidado de Microbiologia / Professor, Microbiology, Instituto de Higiene e Medicina Tropical da Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal

DOI: https://doi.org/10.29021/spdv.76.2.887

Keywords: Referral and Consultation, Sexual Behavior, Sexual Partners, Sexually Transmitted Diseases

Abstract

Introduction: Partner notification plays a key role in the epidemiological control of the increasingly frequent sexually transmitted infections (STI).

Material and Methods: One hundred consecutive patients from the Venereology consultation of the Santa Maria Hospital in Lisbon answered a questionnaire on notification of partners.

Results: Forty three of the individuals had a previous history of STI, 25 of which had a previous diagnosis of HIV infection. Sixty-four patients said that they informed their partners about the diagnosis. Of those who did not inform, 50% no longer have contact with the partners and 36% consider that was not important. Regarding partner notification methods: 98% found appropriate to bring a leaflet about the disease to the partners; 72% would agree to give a consultation authorization to the partner, 58% considered that taking the medication directly to the partner would be an option, 58% thought appropriate that the partner's family doctor call them for a consultation; and 42% considered appropriate to send an email or mobile message.

Discussion: The high percentage a previous STI diagnosis suggests this is a group of individuals with the highest risk of STI transmission. A high percentage (36%) of those who did not inform the partners felt that it would not be important, which may reveal a failure of communication from the health professional. The method considered the most suitable was passive reporting.

Conclusion: It is necessary to improve effective partner notification at it is highly needed to reduce the incidence of STI.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Sexually transmitted infections in Europe 2013. European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC); Stockholm: ECDC; 2015.

Ward H, Bell G. Partner notification. Medicine (Abingdon, England : UK Ed). 2014;42(6):314-7.

Althaus CL, Turner KM, Mercer CH, Auguste P, Roberts TE, Bell G, et al. Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of traditional and new partner notification technologies for curable sexually transmitted infections: observational study, systematic reviews and mathematical modelling. Health Technol Assess. 2014;18(2):1-100, vii-viii.

Hogben M. Partner notification for sexually transmitted diseases. Clin Infect Dis. 2007;44 Suppl 3:S160-74.

van Aar F, Schreuder I, van Weert Y, Spijker R, Gotz H, Op de Coul E. Current practices of partner notification among MSM with HIV, gonorrhoea and syphilis in the Netherlands: an urgent need for improvement. BMC Infect Dis. 2012;12:114.

Arunkumar S, Kamoji SG, Kasatti G. Partner notification and treatment Institute of Venereology-experience. Indian J Sex Transm Dis. 2013;34(1):10-3.

Low N, Broutet N, Adu-Sarkodie Y, Barton P, Hossain M, Hawkes S. Global control of sexually transmitted infections. Lancet. 2006;368(9551):2001-16.

Trelle S, Shang A, Nartey L, Cassell JA, Low N. Improved effectiveness of partner notification for patients with sexually transmitted infections: systematic review. Bmj. 2007;334(7589):354.

Santo I, Azevedo J, Nunes B, Gomes JP, Borrego MJ. Partner notification for chlamydia trachomatis urogenital infections: eight years of patient referral experience in the major Portuguese sexually transmitted infections clinic, 2000-07. Int J STD AIDS. 2011;22(10):548-51.

Shumin C, Zhongwei L, Bing L, Rongtao Z, Benqing S, Shengji Z. Effectiveness of self-referral for male patients with urethral discharge attending a sexually transmitted disease clinic in China. Sex Transm Dis. 2004;31(1):26-32.

Ferreira A, Young T, Mathews C, Zunza M, Low N. Strategies for partner notification for sexually transmitted infections, including HIV. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013(10):Cd002843.

Harrison LW. Anti-Venereal Measures in Denmark and Sweden. Br J Vener Dis. 1939;15(1):1-17.

Wertheimer WJ. The politics of STDs. Dwindling resources for a growing problem. Prim Care. 1990;17(1):183-94.

Cowan FM, French R, Johnson AM. The role and effectiveness of partner notification in STD control: a review. Genitourinary Medicine. 1996;72(4):247-52.

Laar AK, DeBruin DA, Craddock S. Partner notification in the context of HIV: an interest-analysis. AIDS Res Ther. 12. London2015.

Lowndes CM, Fenton KA. Surveillance systems for STIs in the European Union: facing a changing epidemiology. Sex Transm Infect. 2004;80(4):264-71.

Public health benefits of partner notification for sexually transmitted

infections and HIV. European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC); 2013.

Cavalcante EG, Miranda MC, Carvalho AZ, Lima IC, Galvao MT. Partner notification for sexually transmitted infections and perception of notified partners. Rev Esc Enferm USP. 2016;50(3):450-7.

Reed JL, Huppert JS, Gillespie GL, Taylor RG, Holland CK, Alessandrini EA, et al. Adolescent patient preferences surrounding partner notification and treatment for sexually transmitted infections. Acad Emerg Med. 2015;22(1):61-6.

van Aar F, van Weert Y, Spijker R, Gotz H, Op de Coul E. Partner notification among men who have sex with men and heterosexuals with STI/HIV: different outcomes and challenges. Int J STD AIDS. 2015;26(8):565-73.

Op de Coul EL, Spijker R, van Aar F, van Weert Y, de Bruin M. With whom did you have sex? Evaluation of a partner notification training for STI professionals using motivational interviewing. Patient Educ Couns. 2013;93(3):596-603.

Kamanga G, Brown L, Jawati P, Chiwanda D, Nyirenda N. Maximizing HIV partner notification opportunities for index patients and their sexual partners in Malawi. Malawi Med J. 2015;27(4):140-4.

Apoola A, Radcliffe KW, Das S, Robshaw V, Gilleran G, Kumari BS, et al. Patient preferences for partner notification. Sex Transm Infect. 2006;82(4):327-9.

Wright A, Chippindale S, Mercey D. Investigation into the acceptability and effectiveness of a new contact slip in the management of Chlamydia trachomatis at a London genitourinary medicine clinic. Sexually Transmitted Infections. 2002;78(6):422-4.

Partner Notification – Characterization of the Population and Preferences of 100 Consecutive Patients of the Venereology Consultation in a Portuguese Hospital

Abstract

Downloads

References