RSM logo
International Journal of STD & AIDS

Home Current issue Browse archive Alerts About the journal Feedback
 
Int J STD AIDS 2006;17:772-775
doi:10.1258/095646206778691149
© 2006 Royal Society of Medicine Press

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Raval, B.
Right arrow Articles by Challenor, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

Audit report

Clinching the contacts: a tale of two audits before and after the introduction of a contacts' clinic

Bhavin Raval and Rachel Challenor

GUM Department, Derriford Hospital, Plymouth, PL6 8DH, UK; GUM Department, Derriford Hospital, Plymouth, PL6 8DH, UK

Contact tracing outcomes were good (0.8 contacts per case) at the Plymouth genitourinary (GU) medicine clinic when it was a 'walk-in' service. After moving to an appointments-only service, less than 0.5 contacts were seen. From October 2004, we introduced weekly contacts' clinics, which provided early appointments for partners of chlamydia-positive patients. We undertook audits of contact-tracing outcomes before (2004) and after (2005) the introduction of the contacts' clinics. Before, in 2004, 0.46 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.36–0.56) contacts per case were seen within four weeks of the initial partner notification interview. After, in 2005, 0.66 (95% CI 0.57–0.75) contacts were seen within four weeks (P=0.005). Partner notification outcomes were significantly associated with follow-up (P<0.001). There was no difference in success whether the follow-up was by re-attendance or by telephone. This simple change in the clinic schedule has allowed the specialty's evidence-based National Outcome Standards to be met.

Key Words: CHLAMYDIA TRACHOMATIS • NATIONAL OUTCOME STANDARDS • AUDIT • GU MEDICINE • PARTNER NOTIFICATION


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Sex. Transm. Infect.Home page
H Carre, J Boman, A Osterlund, B Garden, and E Nylander
Improved contact tracing for Chlamydia trachomatis with experienced tracers, tracing for one year back in time and interviewing by phone in remote areas
Sex Transm Inf, June 1, 2008; 84(3): 239 - 242.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Units Symbols and Abbreviations Sixth edition