‘Do it yourself’ sexual health care: the user experience
Paula Baraitser A D , Kirsty Collander Brown B , Zachary Gleisner A , Vikki Pearce C , Usha Kumar A and Michael Brady AA Camberwell Sexual Health Centre, 100 Denmark Hill, London SE5 9RS, UK.
B The Print House, 18 Ashwin Street, London E8 3DL, UK.
C Tower Hamlets Primary Care Trust, Aneurin Bevan House, 81 Commercial Road, London E1 1RD, UK.
D Corresponding author. Email: Paula.Baraitser@nhs.net
Sexual Health 8(1) 23-29 https://doi.org/10.1071/SH10029
Submitted: 6 March 2010 Accepted: 3 June 2010 Published: 24 January 2011
Abstract
Objectives: To describe client experience of self-management within a busy walk-in, sexual health service. Self-management in this context is self-registration and take-home pregnancy tests, chlamydia (Chlamydia trachomatis) and gonorrhoea (Neisseria gonorrhoeae) tests, or condoms dispensed from a free vending machine. Methods: Twenty-four in-depth, semi-structured interviews with users; 19 structured written reports from mystery shoppers paid to visit the service and report their experience; demographic details of those using the self-management option from the clinic database and 40 h of recorded observation in the clinic waiting room. Results: Between 2 September 2008 and 1 September 2009, 18 657 people had 28 545 attendances at the service. Of these, 1845 (6.5%) attendances were self-managed by 1555 individuals (8.3% of all clients). Of those who self-managed, 646 (35%) obtained a chlamydia and gonorrhoea test only, 597 (32%) obtained condoms only and 488 (27%) obtained a pregnancy test only. Users valued the opportunity to self-manage because of the reduced waiting times, autonomy and privacy that such a service offers. Some prefer the additional support offered within a clinical consultation. Users made personalised decisions about self-management based on time pressure, need for additional services and preferred source of support. Users often required help and advice from client support workers to complete the self-management process. This created problems with confidentiality. Conclusions: Self-management is an acceptable option within sexual health services if informal support is available. Self-management options in clinical services could mean that 8% of clients at 6% of visits do not need to see a clinician, thus freeing up clinical capacity.
Additional keywords: health care, self-management.
Acknowledgements
This work was part of a program to redesign sexual health services in south-east London funded by the Guys and St Thomas’ Charity.
[1]
[2] Baraitser P, Pearce V, Holmes J, Boynton P. Chlamydia testing in community pharmacies: evaluation of a feasibility pilot in south east London. Qual Saf Health Care 2007; 16 303–7.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | CAS | PubMed |
[3] Roy S, Caillouette J, Faden J, Roy T, Ramos D. Improving appropriate use of antifungal medications: the role of an over the counter vaginal pH self test device. Infect Dis Obstet Gynecol 2003; 11 209–16.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed |
[4] Shew M, Hellerstedt W, Sieving R, Smith A, Fee R. Prevalence of home pregnancy testing among adolescents. Am J Public Health 2000; 90 974–6.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | CAS | PubMed |
[5] Gaydos C, Dwyer K, Barnes M, Rizzo Price P, Wood B, Flemming T, et al. Internet based screening for Chlamydia tracomatis to reach non-clinic populations with mailed self administered vaginal swabs. Sex Transm Dis 2006; 33 451–7.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed |
[6] Tideman R, Chen M, Pitts M, Ginige S, Slaney M, Fairley C. A randomised controlled trial comparing computer-asssisted with face-to-face sexual history taking in a clinical setting. Sex Transm Infect 2007; 83 52–6.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | CAS | PubMed |
[7] Ryan A, Greenfield S, McManus R, Wilson S. Self-care – has DIY gone too far? Br J Gen Pract 2006; 56 907–8.
| PubMed |
[8] Needham C. Realising the potential of co-production: negotiating improvements in public services. Soc Policy Soc 2008; 7 221–31.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[9] Wilson S, Ryan A, Greenfield S, Clifford S, Holdre R, Pattison H, et al. Self-testing for cancer: a community survey. BMC Cancer 2008; 8 102.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed |
[10]
[11] Baraitser P, Pearce V, Walsh N, Cooper R, Collander Brown K, Holmes J, et al. Professional patients as service evaluators: a sexual health service pilot. Health Expect 2008; 11 54–62.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed |
[12] Doshi JS, French RS, Evans HE, Wilkinson CL. Feasibility of a self-completed history questionnaire in women requesting repeat combined hormonal contraception. J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care 2008; 34 51–4.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed |
[13] Powell-Jackson R, Glasier A, Cameron S. Benefits of using a digital video disk for providing information about abortion to women requesting termination of pregnancy. Contraception 2010; 81 537–41.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed |
AGynaecology training associates are lay women trained to teach pelvic examination while acting as the patient.
BThis audit was undertaken by Dr Aysha Butt, specialist registrar in general practice.