Attitudes to chlamydia screening elicited using the social networking site Facebook for subject recruitment
Navera Ahmed A B , Yasmin Jayasinghe A B C , John D. Wark D E , Yeshe Fenner A F , Elya E. Moore F , Sepehr N. Tabrizi A B F , Ashley Fletcher A F and Suzanne M. Garland A B F G HA Department of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, The Royal Women’s Hospital, Parkville, Vic. 3052, Australia.
B Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Vic. 3052, Australia.
C Department of Gynaecology, Royal Children’s Hospital, Parkville, Vic. 3052, Australia.
D Department of Medicine, Royal Melbourne Hospital, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Vic. 3052, Australia.
E Bone and Mineral Medicine, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, Vic. 3052, Australia.
F Infectious Diseases and Microbiology, Murdoch Children’s Research Institute, Parkville, Vic. 3052, Australia.
G Department of Microbiology, Royal Children’s Hospital, Parkville, Vic. 3052, Australia.
H Corresponding author. Email: suzanne.garland@thewomens.org.au
Sexual Health 10(3) 224-228 https://doi.org/10.1071/SH12198
Submitted: 2 September 2012 Accepted: 13 January 2013 Published: 24 May 2013
Abstract
Background: Chlamydia (Chlamydia trachomatis) is the commonest bacterial sexually transmissible infection worldwide and contributes to significant morbidity in females. We examined potential barriers and facilitating factors for screening in young Victorian women, using the social networking site, Facebook to recruit participants. Methods: This was part of a larger study on young women’s health that assessed the feasibility of using social networking sites for recruitment. An advertisement was placed on Facebook between May and September 2010, and was visible to eligible women. Women who clicked on the advertisement and expressed their interest in participating were invited to complete a questionnaire either at a study site or online. Results: In total, 278 participants completed the survey, with 76% reporting willingness to participate in chlamydia screening by recruitment via an online system. Overall, 73% of participants indicated they were comfortable providing a urine sample collected at home for chlamydia screening, with older participants less comfortable with this method (P = 0.02, odds ratio (OR) = 0.09, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.01–0.7). Participants expressed comfort with their Pap smear and chlamydia screening being performed together (92.7%), especially those who were aware of human papillomavirus (P < 0.01, OR = 2.5, 95% CI = 1.3–4.7). Conclusions: This study demonstrated willingness by young Victorian women using Facebook to participate in screening for chlamydia. There was strong acceptance of self-collected sampling, and of combined chlamydia and cervical cytology screening. Facebook may therefore be a feasible way for improving screening coverage at a population level.
Additional keywords: Australia, internet, self-collected samples, testing, young women.
References
[1] Currie MJ, Bowden FJ. The importance of chlamydial infections in obstetrics and gynaecology: an update. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2007; 47 2–8.| The importance of chlamydial infections in obstetrics and gynaecology: an update.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 17261092PubMed |
[2] Australian Government, Department of Health and Ageing (DoHA). Number of notifications for all diseases by year, Australia, 1991 to 2010 and year-to-date notifications for 2011. Canberra: DoHA; Available online at: http://www9.health.gov.au/cda/Source/Rpt_2.cfm?RequestTimeout=500 [verified April 2011].
[3] Harris M, Bennet J, Del Mar C, Fasher M, Foreman L, Furler J, et al. Guidelines for preventive activities in general practice (“the red book”). Melbourne: The Royal Australian College of General Practitioners; 2009. Available online at: http://www.racgp.org.au/Content/NavigationMenu/ClinicalResources/RACGPGuidelines/TheRedBook/redbook_7th_edition_May_2009.pdf [verified April 2011].
[4] Guy RJ, Kong F, Goller J, Franklin N, Bergeri I, Dimech W. A new national chlamydia sentinel surveillance system in Australia: evaluation of the first stage of implementation. Commun Dis Intell 2010; 34 319–28.
[5] SENSIS. Social media report– what Australian people and businesses are doing with social media. Melbourne: SENSIS; 2011. Available online at: http://about.sensis.com.au/ignitionsuite/uploads/docs/sensis%20social%20media%20report.pdf [verfied July 2012].
[6] Fenner Y, Garland SM, Moore EE, Jayasinghe Y, Fletcher A, Tabrizi SN, et al Web-based recruiting for health research using a social networking site: an exploratory study. J Med Internet Res 2012; 14 e20
| Web-based recruiting for health research using a social networking site: an exploratory study.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 22297093PubMed |
[7] Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). Cat. no. 2068.0 – 2006 census tables. 2006 census of population and housing. Canberra: ABS; 2006. Available online at: http://www.censusdata.abs.gov.au/ABSNavigation/prenav/SelectLocationOrTopic?viewBySelection=View+Census+Tables+by+Topic&nextButton=Next+%3E&collection=Census&period=2006&areacode=&geography=&method=&productlabel=&producttype=Census+Tables&topic=&navmapdisplayed=true&javascript=true&breadcrumb=PO&topholder=0&leftholder=0 ¤taction=601 &action=301&textversion=false [Accessed April 2011].
[8] Sacks-Davis R, Gold J, Aitken CK, Hellard ME. Home-based chlamydia testing of young people attending a music festival – who will pee and post? BMC Public Health 2010; 10 376
| Home-based chlamydia testing of young people attending a music festival – who will pee and post?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 20584287PubMed |
[9] Novak DP, Karlsson RB. Simplifying chlamydia testing: an innovative Chlamydia trachomatis testing approach using the internet and a home sampling strategy: population based study. Sex Transm Infect 2006; 82 142–7.
| Simplifying chlamydia testing: an innovative Chlamydia trachomatis testing approach using the internet and a home sampling strategy: population based study.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BD287osFCkug%3D%3D&md5=4e8f950c2fa51b38cda6a324ae3d8ea2CAS | 16581742PubMed |
[10] Poljski C, Atkin L, Williams H. Review of sexual health clinical services in Victoria. Melbourne: Family Planning Victoria; 2003.
[11] Østergaard L, Andersen B, Olesen F, Møller JK. Efficacy of home sampling for screening of Chlamydia trachomatis: randomised study. BMJ 1998; 317 26–7.
| Efficacy of home sampling for screening of Chlamydia trachomatis: randomised study.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 9651263PubMed |
[12] Richardson E, Sellors JW, Mackinnon S, Woodcox V, Howard M, Jang D, et al Prevalence of Chlamydia trachomatis infections and specimen collection preference among women, using self-collected vaginal swabs in community settings. Sex Transm Dis 2003; 30 880–5.
| Prevalence of Chlamydia trachomatis infections and specimen collection preference among women, using self-collected vaginal swabs in community settings.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 14646634PubMed |
[13] Bowden FJ, Currie MJ, Toyne H, McGuiness C, Lim LL, Butler JR, et al Screening for Chlamydia trachomatis at the time of routine Pap smear in general practice: a cluster randomised controlled trial. Med J Aust 2008; 188 76–80.
| 18205578PubMed |
