Literature DB >> 25703741

Exploring access and attitudes to regular sexually transmitted infection screening: the views of young, multi-ethnic, inner-city, female students.

Rebecca Normansell1, Vari M Drennan2, Pippa Oakeshott1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Low uptake of sexually transmitted infection (STI) testing by young people is a major public health problem worldwide. The aims of this qualitative, community-based study were to explore access and attitudes to STI screening in high risk, young, ethnically diverse female students.
METHODS: Qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted at an inner-London further education college with 17 women aged 16-25 years.
RESULTS: The women wanted convenient, regular STI testing and perceived this as responsible behaviour. However, they doubted the maturity of their peers who were unlikely to view themselves as candidates for testing, and feared the perceived stigma associated with testing. This was reflected in their preference for confidential testing. Despite attending their general practice for non-sexual health matters, most did not consider this option for STI testing. However, the long wait in specialist clinics was an important barrier. Many younger participants would not want postal STI sample kits sent to their homes. We found dissatisfaction with sexual health education.
CONCLUSIONS: STI screening for underserved groups such as young sexually active ethnically diverse female college students needs to be confidential, convenient, easily accessed and offered in ways that allow them to consider themselves as candidates for such screening without fear of social stigma. Family doctors should be aware that young women often do not perceive primary care to be an option for accessing STI screening, and could consider ways of advertising these services. Policymakers and commissioners should be aware that clinic waiting times and lack of education remain barriers to testing.
© 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  education; ethnic groups; qualitative research; sexually transmitted infection; women's health

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25703741      PMCID: PMC5055273          DOI: 10.1111/hex.12354

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Expect        ISSN: 1369-6513            Impact factor:   3.377


  23 in total

1.  Sexual health services in England: keeping the jewel in the crown.

Authors:  Jackie A Cassell
Journal:  Sex Transm Infect       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 3.519

2.  Overcoming the barriers to chlamydia screening in general practice--a qualitative study.

Authors:  Cliodna A M McNulty; Elaine Freeman; Rebecca Howell-Jones; Angela Hogan; Sarah Randall; William Ford-Young; Philippa Beckwith; Isabel Oliver
Journal:  Fam Pract       Date:  2010-03-22       Impact factor: 2.267

3.  Improving participation in Chlamydia screening programs: perspectives of high-risk youth.

Authors:  Diane R Blake; Margaret H Kearney; J Michael Oakes; Susan K Druker; Roger Bibace
Journal:  Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med       Date:  2003-06

4.  Choosing and using services for sexual health: a qualitative study of women's views.

Authors:  M Dixon-Woods; T Stokes; B Young; K Phelps; K Windridge; R Shukla
Journal:  Sex Transm Infect       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 3.519

5.  Opportunistic screening for genital chlamydial infection. I: acceptability of urine testing in primary and secondary healthcare settings.

Authors:  J M Pimenta; M Catchpole; P A Rogers; E Perkins; N Jackson; C Carlisle; S Randall; J Hopwood; G Hewitt; G Underhill; H Mallinson; L McLean; T Gleave; J Tobin; V Harindra; A Ghosh
Journal:  Sex Transm Infect       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 3.519

6.  Young women's decisions to accept chlamydia screening: influences of stigma and doctor-patient interactions.

Authors:  Myles Balfe; Ruairi Brugha; Diarmuid O'Donovan; Emer O'Connell; Deirdre Vaughan
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2010-07-19       Impact factor: 3.295

7.  Beliefs about chlamydia testing amongst young people living in relatively deprived areas.

Authors:  A R Booth; P R Harris; E Goyder; P Norman
Journal:  J Public Health (Oxf)       Date:  2012-10-05       Impact factor: 2.341

8.  Young women's perspective of the pros and cons to seeking screening for chlamydia and gonorrhea: an exploratory study.

Authors:  Mariam R Chacko; Kirk von Sternberg; Mary M Velasquez; Constance M Wiemann; Peggy B Smith; Ralph DiClemente
Journal:  J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 1.814

9.  Understanding patient choices for attending sexually transmitted infection testing services: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Carrie Llewellyn; Alex Pollard; Alec Miners; Daniel Richardson; Martin Fisher; John Cairns; Helen Smith
Journal:  Sex Transm Infect       Date:  2012-05-24       Impact factor: 3.519

10.  Take the sex out of STI screening! Views of young women on implementing chlamydia screening in General Practice.

Authors:  Natasha L Pavlin; Rhian Parker; Christopher K Fairley; Jane M Gunn; Jane Hocking
Journal:  BMC Infect Dis       Date:  2008-05-09       Impact factor: 3.090

View more
  9 in total

1.  Exploring psychosocial predictors of STI testing in University students.

Authors:  H A Martin-Smith; E A Okpo; E R Bull
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2018-05-29       Impact factor: 3.295

2.  Determinants of online health information-seeking behavior: A cross-sectional survey among residents of an urban settlement in Delhi.

Authors:  Pragyan Paramita Parija; Poornima Tiwari; Priyanka Sharma; Sunil Kumar Saha
Journal:  J Educ Health Promot       Date:  2020-12-29

3.  Web-based chlamydia education for university students: A pilot project.

Authors:  Nancy G Russell; Phyllis W Sharps; Elizabeth Sloand
Journal:  Nurs Open       Date:  2022-05-28

4.  Which sexually active young female students are most at risk of pelvic inflammatory disease? A prospective study.

Authors:  Phillip E Hay; Sarah R Kerry; Rebecca Normansell; Paddy J Horner; Fiona Reid; Sally M Kerry; Katia Prime; Elizabeth Williams; Ian Simms; Adamma Aghaizu; Jorgen Jensen; Pippa Oakeshott
Journal:  Sex Transm Infect       Date:  2015-06-16       Impact factor: 3.519

5.  Young people's perceptions of smartphone-enabled self-testing and online care for sexually transmitted infections: qualitative interview study.

Authors:  Catherine R H Aicken; Sebastian S Fuller; Lorna J Sutcliffe; Claudia S Estcourt; Voula Gkatzidou; Pippa Oakeshott; Kate Hone; S Tariq Sadiq; Pam Sonnenberg; Maryam Shahmanesh
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2016-09-13       Impact factor: 3.295

6.  Medical homelessness and candidacy: women transiting between prison and community health care.

Authors:  Penelope Abbott; Parker Magin; Joyce Davison; Wendy Hu
Journal:  Int J Equity Health       Date:  2017-07-20

7.  'Test n Treat (TnT)'- Rapid testing and same-day, on-site treatment to reduce rates of chlamydia in sexually active further education college students: study protocol for a cluster randomised feasibility trial.

Authors:  Sarah Kerry-Barnard; Charlotte Fleming; Fiona Reid; Rachel Phillips; Vari M Drennan; Elisabeth J Adams; Wendy Majewska; Anjella Balendra; Emma Harding-Esch; Emma Cousins; S Tariq Sadiq; Pippa Oakeshott
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2018-06-05       Impact factor: 2.279

8.  Application of the COM-B model to barriers and facilitators to chlamydia testing in general practice for young people and primary care practitioners: a systematic review.

Authors:  Lorraine K McDonagh; John M Saunders; Jackie Cassell; Tyrone Curtis; Hamad Bastaki; Thomas Hartney; Greta Rait
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2018-10-22       Impact factor: 7.327

9.  Understanding the acceptability, barriers and facilitators for chlamydia and gonorrhoea screening in technical colleges: qualitative process evaluation of the "Test n Treat" trial.

Authors:  Charlotte Fleming; Vari M Drennan; Sarah Kerry-Barnard; Fiona Reid; Elisabeth J Adams; S Tariq Sadiq; Rachel Phillips; Wendy Majewska; Emma M Harding-Esch; Emma C Cousins; Freya Yoward; Pippa Oakeshott
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2020-08-08       Impact factor: 3.295

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.