Cited by 22Reproductive tract infections researchHIV/AIDS Research and InterventionsHealth Policy Implementation Science

Healthcare providers’ perspectives on expedited partner therapy for chlamydia: a qualitative study: Table 1

Rosenfeld, Elian A, Marx, John, Terry, Martha A, Stall, Ron, Pallatino, Chelsea, Miller, Elizabeth·2015·Sexually Transmitted Infections

Abstract

Objectives Expedited partner therapy (EPT) effectively reduces rates of reinfection with chlamydia and increases the number of partners treated for the infection. Healthcare provider (HCP) provision of EPT is low. The objective of this qualitative study was to understand HCP views and opinions regarding the use of EPT in a state where EPT is permissible but underused. Methods Using a purposive sampling strategy to include diverse HCPs who treat young women at risk for chlamydia, 23 semistructured, in-depth interviews were conducted between October and December 2013. The interviews included questions about knowledge, attitudes, experiences with, and barriers and facilitators regarding the use of EPT. Results Many respondents report using EPT and believe the practice is beneficial for their patients. Most providers were unaware of their colleagues' practices and had limited knowledge regarding institutional policies around EPT. HCPs noted a variety of barriers, such as fear of liability, confusion around the legal status of EPT and not being able to counsel patients' partners that make routine use of this practice a challenge. Facilitators of EPT include speaking on the phone with patients' partners and establishing legislation enabling EPT. Conclusions This is the first study to qualitatively examine HCPs' perspectives on EPT in the USA. Barriers to EPT, including concerns about counselling patients' partners and the legal status of EPT, can be overcome. EPT recommendations co…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/sextrans-2014-051873

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rosenfeld, E. A., Marx, J., Terry, M. A., Stall, R., Pallatino, C., & Miller, E.
Affiliations
  • VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System (US)
  • University of Pittsburgh (US)
Corresponding author
Rosenfeld, Elian A
Venue
Sexually Transmitted Infections
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2015-03-19
Volume
91
Issue
6
Pages
407-411
ISSN
  • 0007-134X (ISSN-L)
  • 1368-4973
  • 1472-3263
OpenAlex
W2107758054
Cited by
21
References
24
Citations by year
2021: 6 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2
FWCI
2.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Sexually Transmitted Infections (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
University of Pittsburgh
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Microbiology › Reproductive tract infections research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › HIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
Keywords
expedited partner therapy, chlamydia, healthcare provider perspectives, liability concerns, telephone counseling, state legislation, young women, reinfection prevention
MeSH terms
Adult, Chlamydia Infections, Chlamydia trachomatis, Female, Health Personnel, Humans, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Male, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Patient Compliance, Sexual Partners, United States, Contact Tracing, Treatment Outcome, Qualitative Research

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review