|
Public Health
Gonorrhoea screening in general practice: perceived barriers and
strategies to improve screening rates
Basil Donovan, Vickie Knight, Anna M McNulty, Virginia Wynne-Markham and Michael R Kidd
MJA 2001; 175: 412-414
→ Other articles have cited this article
Abstract -
Methods -
Results -
Discussion -
Acknowledgements -
Competing interests -
References -
Authors' details
Register to be notified of new articles by e-mail -
Current contents list -
More articles on Sexual health
|
| |
Objective: To investigate perceived barriers to
gonorrhoea screening in general practice and suggest strategies to
overcome them.
Design: Questionnaire-based survey.
Setting and participants: All 47 general
practitioners (GPs) authorised to prescribe subsidised HIV drugs
under the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme in inner, eastern and
northern Sydney.
Main outcome measures: Agreement on a five-point Likert
scale with statements about attitudes and practices in relation to
gonorrhoea screening of homosexually active men, and views on how
testing rates could be increased.
Results: 32 GPs responded (68%). Perceived barriers to
gonorrhoea testing included structural measures imposed by the
Federal Government to limit pathology testing by GPs (the Medicare
"three-test rule") (17 respondents agreed or strongly agreed),
pressure from the Health Insurance Commission (HIC) to minimise
pathology testing (15), concerns about confidentiality of
notification procedures (8), clinical time pressure (8), and
concerns about recriminations against HIV patients with gonorrhoea
(6). Suggested measures to increase testing were education of gay men
to request testing (25), relaxation of the three-test rule (25),
easier tests (23), anonymous notification procedures, review of HIC
policy on screening, and training about testing (21 each).
Conclusions: Sydney GPs with high HIV caseloads
perceived structural barriers to gonorrhoea testing and supported a
range of achievable strategies to overcome these. As the sustained
epidemic of gonorrhoea in Sydney may be directly promoting HIV
transmission, these strategies should be considered urgently.
|
|
| |
Sydney is currently in the fourth year of an epidemic of gonorrhoea
among homosexually active men, with over 1000 cases reported
annually in the inner city.1,2 This epidemic is of
particular concern as gonorrhoea may be a marker of increased risk of
HIV infection.3 Gonorrhoea also directly
promotes HIV transmission,4 and treating gonorrhoea has
been shown to reduce HIV levels in semen.5 Thus, these sustained high
rates of gonococcal infection are likely to be leading to new,
potentially preventable HIV infections.
Factors that may be contributing to the epidemic are:
-
increasing rates of unsafe sex among a subset of homosexually active
men;6,7
- gonorrhoea outbreaks among gay men in other industrialised
cities7-9 that have links with
Sydney;3
- scaling down of the main public sexual health centre
servicing the inner city;2,3 and
- limited gonorrhoea case-finding in the private sector.2
Most Australians diagnosed with sexually transmissible diseases
(STDs) are managed in the private sector. Medicare,
Australia's universal health insurance system, rebates or heavily
subsidises patient services provided by the private sector. To
minimise abuse of this system, Medicare imposes conditions,
including:
- rebating only three pathology tests
ordered by a general practitioner (GP) on any one patient on any one day
(the "three-test rule");
- discouraging "screening" (testing without symptoms) of patients
through Health Insurance Commission (HIC) advisers, who monitor and
counsel GPs about their use of pathology and radiology services; and
- not rebating STD testing of sex workers.
While urethral gonorrhoea usually causes symptoms in men, prompting
them to seek treatment, anorectal infections have variable, often
subtle, symptoms,3,10 and pharyngeal
gonorrhoea is asymptomatic.11 Consequently, detection
of anorectal and pharyngeal gonorrhoea depends on screening
according to sexual risk history, contact tracing, and maintaining a
low threshold for testing. The relative infrequency of diagnosis of
these infections in general practice2 suggests structural or
cultural barriers to gonorrhoea screening of homosexually active
men. Our study aimed to investigate these barriers and to seek
solutions from a group of GPs with large numbers of patients at
increased risk of gonorrhoea.
|
|
| |
The study was conducted in October 1999. A one-page questionnaire was
sent to all 47 GPs authorised to prescribe subsidised HIV drugs under
the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme in inner, eastern and northern
Sydney. This group was chosen because their practices were located at
the centre of the gonorrhoea epidemic2 and were presumed to contain
substantial numbers of homosexually active men, and because
HIV-infected men are at increased risk of anorectal
gonorrhoea.3
The questionnaire comprised items enquiring about GPs'
attitudes and practices in relation to screening homosexually
active men for gonorrhoea, and their views on how STD testing rates
could be increased. Questions were to be answered on a
five-point Likert scale. All responses were kept anonymous. Most
issues raised on the questionnaire were suggested at informal
meetings with GPs with high HIV caseloads or during the pilot
phase, when five such GPs were sent an earlier draft of the
questionnaire for comment. Non-respondents were not prompted, as it
was necessary to complete the study quickly, before commencement of a
targeted community education program.
|
|
| |
Thirty-two of the 47 GPs (68%) returned the questionnaire. All
disagreed that testing for gonorrhoea is "someone else's job", and 31
of the 32 disagreed with the suggestion that gonorrhoea is "trivial".
Most respondents were aware that men at high risk of STDs who
may have asymptomatic infections attended their practices and most
felt competent to collect laboratory specimens.
Other results are shown in the Box. Interestingly, no respondents
said they treated gonorrhoea empirically without testing to avoid
notification, and few were embarrassed about gonorrhoea testing or
thought it would offend patients. Barriers to gonorrhoea testing
perceived by respondents included Medicare's three-test rule (17
respondents agreed or strongly agreed), pressure from the HIC to
minimise pathology testing (15), concerns about confidentiality of
notification procedures (8), clinical time pressure (8), concerns
about recriminations against HIV patients with gonorrhoea (6), and a
need for the patient to raise the issue of testing (5). One
respondent reported having been directly advised against STD
screening by an HIC adviser, who allegedly stated that such screening
was the role of public clinics.
Respondents supported the following approaches to controlling
gonorrhoea among homosexually active men: education to encourage
gay men to ask for testing (25), relaxation of the three-test rule
(25), easier gonorrhoea tests (23), anonymous STD
notification procedures, review of the HIC policy on STD
screening, and training about testing (21 each).
|
|
| |
The three-test pathology testing rule was the most common factor that
respondents indicated was inhibiting their gonorrhoea screening:
25 of 32 respondents felt that reform was needed. A standard HIV
monitoring visit includes determination of T-cell subsets, viral
load and haematology and biochemistry profiles,12 which
automatically exhausts any Medicare rebate for pathology
providers. The cost of investigating any concurrent medical
conditions, such as hepatitis C or HIV-related symptoms, must then be
absorbed by the pathology service. Adding screening tests for
bacterial STD (gonorrhoea, chlamydia and syphilis), particularly
if required for several patients a day, inevitably strains the
relationship between the ordering doctor and the pathology service.
When preliminary results of this survey were presented to a general
meeting of the Sydney HIV GP Study Group several GPs commented that
they were distorting their clinical practice — and thus delaying
necessary STD screening — to minimise the effect of the
three-test rule.
Clearly, policies intended to curb Medicare spending on pathology
testing in general may have negative implications for STD
control. The simplest solution might be to exempt testing for
STDs from the three-test rule. As a precedent, an exemption
has been justified for cervical cytology tests to promote screening.
Clinical time pressure limiting gonorrhoea testing was an issue for a
quarter of respondents. Possible solutions include moderating
STD screening intervals according to level of risk, and
developing screening guidelines according to results of recent
research into risk factors.3
Respondents strongly supported development of easier tests for
gonorrhoea. Swabbing the throat, urethra and anorectum for
gonorrhoea generates three specimens. Testing the anorectum and
urine for chlamydia — another emerging problem among homosexually
active men8,13,14 — generates two more
specimens. The reliability of gonorrhoea tests collected in general
practice is unknown. There is considerable scope for research into
streamlining and evaluating STD testing in general practice.
Few respondents were concerned about disease notification
procedures and possible repercussions for their HIV patients.
However, notification might be a disincentive for some patients or
their doctors, and anonymous STD notification procedures were
supported by most respondents.
Contact tracing was not seen as a major issue, perhaps because the
identity of the source is very often not known to gay men with
gonorrhoea. Nevertheless, general practice is not well structured
for contact tracing, and support services could be enhanced.
|
|
| | |
This study was funded by the New South Wales Health Department, but the
opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the Department. We
thank Levinia Crooks (Australasian Society for HIV Medicine)
for providing a list of authorised HIV drug prescribers, Paul
Sweeney (Sydney Sexual Health Centre) for assistance with
data handling, and the Sydney HIV GP Study Group for its involvement.
|
|
| | |
None declared.
|
|
| |
- New South Wales Health Department. Year in review: communicable
disease surveillance, 1999. NSW Public Health Bull 2000; 11:
161-168.
-
Donovan B, Bodsworth NJ, McNulty A, et al. Increasing gonorrhoea
reports — not only in London [letter]. Lancet 2000; 355:
1908.
-
Donovan B, Bodsworth NJ, Rohrsheim R, et al. Characteristics of
homosexually active men with gonorrhoea during an epidemic. Int J
STD AIDS 2001; 12: 437-443.
-
Fleming DT, Wasserheit JN. From epidemiological synergy to public
health policy and practice: the contribution of other sexually
transmitted diseases to sexual transmission of HIV infection.
Sex Transm Infect 1999; 73: 3-17.
-
Cohen MS, Hoffman IF, Royce RA, et al. Reduction of concentration of
HIV-1 in semen after treatment of urethritis: implications for
prevention of sexual transmission of HIV-1. Lancet 1997;
349: 1868-1873.
-
Van de Ven P, Prestage G, French J, et al. Increase in unprotected
anal intercourse with casual partners among gay men in 1996-8.
Aust N Z J Public Health 1998; 22: 814-818.
-
Page-Shafer KA, McFarland W, Kohn R, et al. Increases in unsafe sex
and rectal gonorrhoea among men who have sex with men — San Francisco,
California, 1994-1997. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep
1999; 48: 45-48.
-
Handsfield HH, Whittington WLH, Desmon S, et al. Resurgent
bacterial sexually transmitted diseases among men who have sex with
men — King County, Washington, 1997-1999. MMWR Morb
Mortal Wkly Rep 1999; 48: 773-777.
-
Hughes G, Simms I, Rogers PA, et al. New cases seen at genitourinary
medicine clinics: England 1997. Comm Dis Rep 1998; 8: S1-S11.
-
McNulty A. Anorectal gonorrhoea revisited. Venereology
1993; 4: 109-111.
-
Weisner PJ, Tronca E, Bonin P, et al. Clinical spectrum of
pharyngeal gonococcal infection. N Engl J Med 1973; 288:
181-185.
-
Clinical Trials and Treatments Advisory Committee (CTTAC).
Model of Care for HIV Infection in Adults. Canberra: Australian
National Council on AIDS and Related Diseases, 1998.
-
Debattista J, Dwyer J, Orth D, et al. Community screening for
Neisseria gonorrhoeae and Chlamydia trachomatis
among patrons of sex-on-premises venues: two years later.
Venereology 2000; 13: 105-109.
-
Bloch M, Delpech V, Austin D, et al. Screening for gonorrhoea and
chlamydia in gay men in an inner city primary care practice. Presented
at the Australasian Sexual Health Conference Jun 2000; Darwin, NT.
(Received 2 May, accepted 26 Jul 2001)
|
Authors' details | |
Sydney Sexual Health Centre, Sydney Hospital, Sydney, NSW.
Basil Donovan, MD, FACSHP, Director, and Clinical
Professor, Department of Public Health and Community Medicine, University of Sydney, NSW;
Vickie Knight, RN, MHScEd,
Clinical Nurse Consultant;
Anna M McNulty, MM, FACSHP,
Clinical Senior Manager, and Nurse Consultant, School of Community Medicine, University of New South Wales,
Sydney, NSW;
Virginia Wynne-Markham, Administrative Officer.
Department of General Practice, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW.
Michael R Kidd, MD, FRACGP, Professor, and Head.
Reprints will not be available from the authors. Correspondence:
Professor B Donovan, Sydney Sexual Health Centre, Sydney Hospital,
GPO Box 1614, Sydney, NSW 2001.
donovanbATsesahs.nsw.gov.au
©MJA 2001
Make a
comment
Other articles have cited this article:
Christopher K Fairley, Jane Hocking, Jane Gunn and Marcus Y Chen. No barriers to chlamydia testing in sexually active young women Med J Aust 2005; 183 (10): 548-549. [Letters] <http://www.mja.com.au/public/issues/183_10_211105/letters_211105_fm-2.html>
Graeme H Johnson and Donna B Mak. Gonorrhoea screening in general practice: perceived barriers and strategies to improve screening rates Med J Aust 2002; 176 (9): 448-449. [Letters] <http://www.mja.com.au/public/issues/176_09_060502/johnson060502_fm.html>
Readers may print a single copy for personal use. No further
reproduction or distribution of the articles
should proceed without the permission of the publisher. For
permission, contact the
Australasian Medical Publishing Company.
Journalists are welcome to write news stories based on what they read here, but should acknowledge their source as "an article published on the Internet by The Medical Journal of Australia <http://www.mja.com.au>".
<URL: http://www.mja.com.au/>
© 2001 Medical Journal of Australia.
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
| Responses of 32 general practitioners with
high HIV caseloads to a questionnaire about gonorrhoea screening (in order
of frequency of responses) |
|
|
|
|
| Questionnaire item |
Strongly agree/ agree
|
No opinion
|
Strongly disagree/ disagree
|
|
| (Please tick the box you feel is most appropriate) |
|
|
|
| Please comment on the following potential
influences on your screening of homosexually active men for gonorrhoea
|
|
|
|
| The 3-test pathology testing rule impedes
my testing for gonorrhoea and other STDs |
17 |
1 |
14 |
| I feel pressure from the Health Insurance
Commission about my pathology ordering practices |
15 |
3 |
14 |
| It is necessary to swab the throat, urethra
and anus of every gay man who had sex >1 partner every 3 months* |
9 |
5 |
16 |
| I have concerns about the confidentiality
of the notification procedure for gonorrhoea |
8 |
5 |
19 |
| Clinical time pressures prevent me from testing
for gonorrhoea |
8 |
1 |
23 |
| I'm worried about recriminations against my
HIV patients with gonorrhoea† |
6 |
3 |
22 |
| I rarely think of testing my patients for
gonorrhoea |
6 |
2 |
24 |
| There are too many specimens to juggle |
6 |
1 |
25 |
| The patient needs to request gonorrhoea/STD
testing |
5 |
2 |
25 |
| It would offend my patients if I suggested
that they need testing† |
3 |
2 |
26 |
| I am too embarrassed to do anal swabs |
1 |
2 |
29 |
| I would usually know if my patients had gonorrhoea
anyway |
1 |
1 |
30 |
| I treat gonorrhoea empirically without taking
a swab to avoid confidentiality/notification issues |
0 |
1 |
31 |
|
|
|
|
| Which of the following do you believe would
increase testing for gonorrhoea and other STDs |
|
|
|
| Gay men need to be educated to ask for regular
STD testing |
25 |
4 |
3 |
| Relaxing of the 3-test rule (eg, excluding
STD and HIV tests from formula)* |
25 |
2 |
5 |
| Easier pathology tests† |
23 |
1 |
7 |
| Anonymous STD notification procedure† |
21 |
7 |
3 |
| Review of Health Insurance Commission policy
on frequency of STD pathology tests |
21 |
8 |
3 |
| Training or an update on gonorrhoea and STD
testing† |
21 |
4 |
6 |
|
| STD=sexually transmissible disease. *Two general
practitioners did not respond to this question. †One general practitioner
did not respond to this question. |
| |
|
| | Back to text |
| |
|