Use of a community sexual health information line
Vickie Knight A B , Kristie Hoskin A and Kate Tribe AA Sydney Sexual Health Centre, Sydney; and Sydney Eye Hospital, GPO Box 1614, Sydney, NSW 2001, Australia.
B Corresponding author. Email: knightv@sesahs.nsw.gov.au
Sexual Health 2(1) 29-32 https://doi.org/10.1071/SH04039
Submitted: 28 September 2004 Accepted: 17 February 2005 Published: 22 March 2005
Abstract
Background: Since 1989 Sydney Sexual Health Centre has provided a community phone information line (PIL). The service aims to educate and promote the sexual health of the community and facilitate efficient use of the centre’s resources through the provision of information and advice to the community and health professionals; a referral service; and patient triage. In October 1997 a comprehensive computerised database was developed to collect caller information. In 2003, a 5-year review of the PIL database was undertaken with the express aim of describing the profile of people using the service. Methods: We analysed data from the PIL from 16 October 1997 to end 20 December 2002 using SPSS. Results: A total of 34 013 callers were in the PIL database. Every year the service has seen an increase in demand from 5295 calls in 1998 (first full year of service) to 8401 in 2002. The majority of callers lived in central and southeast Sydney geographical area, however, calls were registered from over 55% of postcodes in NSW and from interstate. The average caller age each year was 32 years with similar standard deviation and the distribution over time has not changed. There were equal numbers of male and female callers each year. Peak times for people to call the PIL were 2–4 pm with a high number of callers at 10 am. In general, calls were between 4 and 6 Min duration. Overall, 14 098 (41.4%) of calls in the database were for general sexual health information. The majority of the information callers over the period who have been calling about infections have called about herpes simplex virus. Conclusions: As is evident the PIL meets a specific community need. This study did not, however, look at patient outcomes and this area needs investigation to fully evaluate the benefits of a community PIL.
Additional keywords: telephone information line, service evaluation.
Acknowledgments
Thanks to all the sexual health nurses who staff the PIL, Dr Cathy Pell for her input into study design and evaluation and Richard Rohrsheim for developing and maintaining the PIL database.
[1] Monaghan R, Clifford C, McDonald P. Seeking advice from NHS direct on common childhood complaints: does it matter who answers the phone? J Adv Nurs 2003; 42(2): 209–16.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed |
[2] Crouch R, Dale J. Telephone triage—identifying the demand. Nurs Stand 1998; 12(34): 33–8.
[3] Govier I, Howells G, Jones S. NHS Direct Wales: a national nurse-led service. Nurs Stand 2000; 14(48): 33–4.
| PubMed |
[4] Toon PD. Editorial: Using telephones in primary care: a signficiant proportion of consultation might take place by phone. BMJ 2002; 324(7348): 1230–1.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed |
[5] Larson-Dahn ML. Tel-eNursing Practice: setting standards for practice across the continuum of care. J Nurs Adm 2002; 32(10): 524–30.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed |
[6] Zeek C.. Trade in your call center for an intergrated medical contact center: smart network technology solutions breakdown cost barriers and create opportunities. Computers Informatics Nursing Plus 2002; 5(1).
| PubMed |
[7] Cady R. Pitfalls in telephone triage. American Journal of Maternal Child Nursing 1999; 24(3): 157.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed |
[8] Neumann MS. Profile of callers to the centers for disease control and prevention national sexually trasnmitted diseases hotline. Sex Transm Dis 1996; 23(2): 131–7.
| PubMed |
[9] Melzer SM, Poole SR. Computerized pediatric telephone triage and advice programs at children's hospitals: operating and financial characteristics. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 1999; 153(8): 858–63.
| PubMed |
[10] Nobili A, Macario G, Frewini G, Rossetti AVE, Acik VO. What clinical information do doctors need? Information lines run by doctors are useful. BMJ 1997; 314(7084): 904.
| PubMed |
[11] Kalman CB, Jugan L, Pochron C, Sherman C. Computerized telephone triage. The KidsCare Perspective: a pediatric primary care facility uses a new system to inform families and reduce unnecessary visits to the ED. Am J Nurs 2001; 101(11): 30a–1a.
[12] Omery A. Advice nursing practice: on the quality of the evidence. J Nurs Adm 2003; 33(6): 353–60.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed |
[13] Poncia H, Ryan J, Carver M. Next day telephone follow up of the elderly: a needs assessment and critical incident monitoring tool for the accident and emergency department. Jounal of Accident Emergency Medicine 2001; 17( ): 337–40.
[14] Dale J, Crouch R, Lloyd D. Primary care: nurse-led telephone triage and advice out-of-hours. Nursing Standard 1998; 12(47): 41–45.
[15] Watson S. Nurse telephone lines ‘safe and effective’. Nurs Stand 1998; 13(5): 6.
[16] Kevin J.. An evaluation of telephone trage in mental health nursing. Australian e-Journal for the Advancement of Mental Health 2002; 1(1): 3–12.
[17] Richards D, Meakins J, Tawfil J, Godfrey L, Dutoon E, Richardson G, et al. Nurse telephone triage for same day appointments in general practice: multiple interrupted time series trial of effect on workload and costs. BMJ 2002; 325(7374): 1214.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed |
[18] Sydney Sexual Health Centre. Patient Flow Survey. Sydney: Sydney Eye Hospital; 1997
