• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

男性和女性管理衣原体感染的首选策略。

Preferred strategies of men and women for managing chlamydial infection.

作者信息

Melvin L, Cameron S T, Glasier A, Scott G, Johnstone A, Elton R

机构信息

Lothian Family Planning and Well Woman Services, Dean Terrace, Edinburgh, UK.

出版信息

BJOG. 2009 Feb;116(3):357-65. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2008.01977.x.

DOI:10.1111/j.1471-0528.2008.01977.x
PMID:19187367
Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To determine men and women's preferred strategies for managing chlamydial infection: partner notification (patient referral), postal testing kit (PTK) or patient-delivered partner medication (PDPM).

DESIGN

Interviewer-conducted questionnaires (women) and anonymous, self-administered questionnaires (men).

POPULATION

Women infected with chlamydia who were participating in a randomised study assigning partners to patient referral, PTK or PDPM. Men attending genitourinary medicine, family planning and fracture clinics in Edinburgh.

METHODS

Men and women were asked their preferred strategy for testing/treating sexual partners (patient referral, PTK or PDPM) if they or their partner had a positive chlamydia test. Women were also asked the reasons for their choice and whether partners were satisfied with the intervention received.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Reported preferences of men and women for testing/treating partners.

RESULTS

Response rates were 97 and 81% for the women's questionnaires at study entry and 6 months, respectively, and 81% for the men's questionnaires. Of 174 women responding, 67% preferred PDPM for partners and 57% would prefer PDPM for themselves. The main reasons were that PDPM allows simpler, more convenient and faster treatment. Women reported that 65% of partners were satisfied with whichever intervention they received. Of 293 men responding, 70% would choose patient referral for partners and 53% would prefer patient referral for themselves. Men previously tested for chlamydia were significantly more likely to choose PDPM (n = 22) than those never tested (n = 7); P < 0.001. Only 3% of women and 9% of men preferred PTKs for partners.

CONCLUSION

The results suggest that women prefer PDPM and men, at least hypothetically, prefer patient referral. PTK appears unpopular with both sexes.

摘要

目的

确定男性和女性对于管理衣原体感染的首选策略:性伴侣通知(患者转诊)、邮寄检测试剂盒(PTK)或患者自行给药性伴侣治疗(PDPM)。

设计

由访谈者进行的问卷调查(女性)和匿名的自我管理问卷调查(男性)。

研究对象

参与一项将性伴侣随机分配至患者转诊、PTK或PDPM的随机研究的衣原体感染女性。在爱丁堡泌尿生殖医学、计划生育和骨折诊所就诊的男性。

方法

询问男性和女性如果他们或其性伴侣衣原体检测呈阳性,他们对于检测/治疗性伴侣的首选策略(患者转诊、PTK或PDPM)。还询问女性做出选择的原因以及性伴侣对所接受干预措施的满意度。

主要观察指标

男性和女性报告的对于检测/治疗性伴侣的偏好。

结果

女性问卷在研究开始时和6个月时的回复率分别为97%和81%,男性问卷的回复率为81%。在174名做出回复的女性中,67%希望为性伴侣选择PDPM,57%希望为自己选择PDPM。主要原因是PDPM使治疗更简单、方便和快捷。女性报告称65%的性伴侣对所接受的任何干预措施都感到满意。在293名做出回复的男性中,70%会为性伴侣选择患者转诊,53%希望为自己选择患者转诊。之前接受过衣原体检测的男性比从未检测过的男性更有可能选择PDPM(分别为22名和7名);P<0.001。只有3%的女性和9%的男性希望为性伴侣选择PTK。

结论

结果表明女性更喜欢PDPM,而男性至少在假设情况下更喜欢患者转诊。PTK似乎不受男女双方欢迎。

相似文献

1
Preferred strategies of men and women for managing chlamydial infection.男性和女性管理衣原体感染的首选策略。
BJOG. 2009 Feb;116(3):357-65. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2008.01977.x.
2
Willingness of gynaecologists, doctors in family planning, GPs, practice nurses and pharmacists to adopt novel interventions for treating sexual partners of women with chlamydia.妇科医生、计划生育医生、全科医生、执业护士和药剂师采用新干预措施治疗衣原体感染女性性伴侣的意愿。
BJOG. 2007 Dec;114(12):1516-21. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2007.01506.x. Epub 2007 Sep 17.
3
Novel interventions to reduce re-infection in women with chlamydia: a randomized controlled trial.降低衣原体感染女性再感染率的新型干预措施:一项随机对照试验。
Hum Reprod. 2009 Apr;24(4):888-95. doi: 10.1093/humrep/den475. Epub 2009 Jan 9.
4
Effect of expedited treatment of sex partners on recurrent or persistent gonorrhea or chlamydial infection.性伴侣快速治疗对复发性或持续性淋病或衣原体感染的影响。
N Engl J Med. 2005 Feb 17;352(7):676-85. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa041681.
5
Patient-delivered partner treatment for male urethritis: a randomized, controlled trial.患者主导的性伴治疗男性尿道炎:一项随机对照试验。
Clin Infect Dis. 2005 Sep 1;41(5):623-9. doi: 10.1086/432476. Epub 2005 Jul 19.
6
Chlamydia partner services for females in California family planning clinics.加利福尼亚计划生育诊所中为女性提供衣原体伙伴服务。
Sex Transm Dis. 2011 Oct;38(10):913-8. doi: 10.1097/OLQ.0b013e3182240366.
7
Partner notification for chlamydia trachomatis urogenital infections: eight years of patient referral experience in the major Portuguese sexually transmitted infections clinic, 2000-07.沙眼衣原体泌尿生殖系统感染的性伴通知:2000年至2007年葡萄牙主要性传播感染诊所八年的患者转诊经验
Int J STD AIDS. 2011 Oct;22(10):548-51. doi: 10.1258/ijsa.2011.010268.
8
Experiences and outcomes of partner notification among men and women recently diagnosed with Chlamydia and their views on innovative resources aimed at improving notification rates.最近被诊断患有衣原体感染的男性和女性在性伴侣通知方面的经验和结果,以及他们对旨在提高通知率的创新资源的看法。
Sex Transm Dis. 2010 Apr;37(4):253-8. doi: 10.1097/OLQ.0b013e3181d012e0.
9
Expedited partner therapy for Chlamydia trachomatis at the community pharmacy.社区药房对沙眼衣原体进行性伴侣快速治疗。
BJOG. 2010 Aug;117(9):1074-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2010.02573.x. Epub 2010 May 25.
10
Partner notification of sexually transmitted diseases: practices and preferences.性传播疾病的性伴侣通知:实践与偏好。
Sex Transm Dis. 2011 Sep;38(9):821-7. doi: 10.1097/OLQ.0b013e31821c390b.

引用本文的文献

1
Testing the Interpersonal-Behavior model to explain intentions to use patient-delivered partner therapy.测试人际行为模型以解释使用患者传递伴侣治疗的意愿。
PLoS One. 2020 May 20;15(5):e0233348. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0233348. eCollection 2020.
2
Strategies for partner notification for sexually transmitted infections, including HIV.性传播感染(包括艾滋病毒)的性伴侣通知策略。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Oct 3;2013(10):CD002843. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD002843.pub2.
3
Expedited partner therapy for sexually transmitted infections.
性传播感染的加速性伴侣治疗。
Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2012 Oct;24(5):299-304. doi: 10.1097/GCO.0b013e3283577e9d.