Free Standard AU & NZ Shipping For All Book Orders Over $80!
Register      Login
Sexual Health Sexual Health Society
Publishing on sexual health from the widest perspective
RESEARCH ARTICLE

Contact tracing for sexually transmitted infections in New South Wales, Australia

Melissa McCarthy A , Lewis J. Haddow A , Virginia Furner B and Adrian Mindel A C
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations

A Sexually Transmitted Infections Research Centre and the University of Sydney, Marian Villa, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, NSW 2145, Australia.

B Albion Street Centre, 150-154 Albion Street, Surry Hills, NSW 2010, Australia.

C Corresponding author. Email: adrianm@icpmr.wsahs.nsw.gov.au

Sexual Health 4(1) 21-25 https://doi.org/10.1071/SH06019
Submitted: 20 March 2006  Accepted: 13 October 2006   Published: 26 February 2007

Abstract

Background: Contact tracing is an important strategy in the control of sexually transmitted infections (STI) because it encourages individuals who may be unaware they have been exposed to an infection to be tested and treated. The aim of this study was to review STI contact tracing procedures in NSW by sexual health clinics (SHC), public health units (PHU) and general practitioners (GP). Methods: A questionnaire study carried out in 2004–2005 of SHC, PHU and a random sample of GP in NSW. SHC and PHU participated in structured interviews and GP completed questionnaires at educational workshops or through a mail-out. Interviews and questionnaires addressed current contact tracing practice and methods of improving the service. Results: All 35 SHC, 6/18 (33%) PHU and 172/212 (81%) of the GP who responded to the survey undertook contact tracing for STI. Chlamydia was the STI most commonly traced by SHC (34/35, 97%) and GP (165/172, 96%). HIV was the STI most commonly traced by PHU (5/6, 83%). Only 23/172 (13%) GP were familiar with the ‘Australasian contact tracing manual’. The commonest barriers to tracing for SHC and GP included patient reluctance (SHC 60%, GP 71%), and the lack of contact details for partners (SHC 46%, GP 60%). GP identified the availability of information for patients (82%) and more training (55%) as necessary resources for optimal contact tracing. Conclusions: SHC and GP frequently undertook contact tracing for some STI; PHU do so less frequently. Barriers to contact tracing are similar for all health-care providers. For GP, there is a need for increased training and the development of written policies and agreed pathways for referral.


Acknowledgements

This study was funded by a grant from the NSW Department of Health. We would like to thank all sexual health clinics, public health units and general practitioners in NSW who agreed to participate in this study. We would also like to thank current and former steering committee members Greg Ussher, Tony Brown, Mark Bartlett, Levinia Crooks, Cammi Webb, Andrey Zheluk and Victor Tawil for their contributions to this project.


References


[1] Keogh L,  Hammond J,  Mulvey G,  Temple-Smith M. Contact tracing for sexually transmissible diseases in general-practice in Victoria, Australia. Venereology 1998; 11(1): 32–7.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | [verified October 2006].

[6] Health Administration Act 1982. http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/haa1982221/ [verified October 2006].

[7] Thompson SC,  McEachern KA,  Stevenson EM,  Forsyth JR. The epidemiology of notified genital Chlamydia trachomatis infection in Victoria, Australia: a survey of diagnosing providers. Int J STD AIDS 1997; 8 382–7.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed | [verified October 2006].

[12] SPSS: statistical package for the social sciences. Version 13.0 for Windows. Chicago IL: SPSS Inc.; 2004.

[13] Communicable diseases surveillance and control unit, NSW Health Department. Infectious Diseases Fact Sheet. Sydney: NSW Health Department; 2002. Available online at: http://www.health.nsw.gov.au/infect/diseases.html [verified December 2006].

[14] Stokes T,  Schober P. A survey of contact tracing practice for sexually transmitted diseases in GUM clinics in England and Wales. Int J STD AIDS 1999; 10 17–21.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed |

[15] Fenton KA,  French R,  Giesecke J,  Johnson AM,  Trotter S,  Petruckevitch A,  Copas A,  Keenlyside R,  Howson J,  Adler MW. An evaluation of partner notification for HIV infection in genitourinary medicine clinics in England. AIDS 1998; 12(1): 95–102.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed |

[16] Landis SE,  Schoenbach VJ,  Weber DJ,  Mittal M,  Krishan B,  Lewis K,  Koch GG. Results of a randomized trial of partner notification in cases of HIV infection in North Carolina. N Engl J Med 1992; 326(2): 101–6.
PubMed |

[17] Tyden T,  Ramstedt K. A survey of patients with Chlamydia trachomatis infection: sexual behaviour and perceptions about contact tracing. Int J STD AIDS 2000; 11 92–5.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed |

[18] Giesecke J,  Granath F,  Ramstedt K,  Ripa T,  Rado G,  Westrell M. Efficacy of partner notification for HIV infection. Lancet 1991; 338 1096–100.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed |

[19] Freedman E,  Britt H,  Harrison C,  Mindel A. Sexual health problems managed in Australian general practice – a National cross-sectional survey. Sex Transm Infect 2006; 82 61–6.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed |

[20] Low N,  Welch J,  Radcliffe K. Developing national outcome standards for the management of gonorrhoea and genital chlamydia in genitourinary medicine clinics. Sex Transm Infect 2004; 80(3): 223–9.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed |