Rebecca Normansell1, Vari M Drennan2, Pippa Oakeshott1. 1. Population Health Research Institute, St George's, University of London, London, UK. 2. Faculty of Health, Social Care & Education, St. George's, University of London & Kingston University, London, UK.
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.
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.
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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