McClean H L, Reid M, Scoular A
Department of Genitourinary Medicine, Royal Infirmary, Glasgow, UK.
Genitourin Med. 1995 Dec;71(6):396-9. doi: 10.1136/sti.71.6.396.
To assess health professionals' views of genitourinary medicine (GUM) services in a large UK city and to determine potential intervention measures for change.
A postal questionnaire was sent to 205 service providers in a range of sexual health services in Glasgow, including GUM specialist doctors, nurses and health advisers. The questionnaire included structured questions about organisation and use of GUM services, assessment of profile and stigma, and asked about factors most likely to influence future service development.
128 questionnaires were returned from areas throughout the city. Non-GUM health professionals had poor factual knowledge about the organisation of GUM services. GUM had a poor profile compared with other sexual health services and stigma was thought to exist about the service. Most non-GUM service providers continue traditionally to regard GUM mainly as a referral centre for a few specific sexually transmitted infections and not as a centre for holistic sexual health care. Genital chlamydial infection and pelvic inflammatory disease were considered low priority for GUM referral by some groups of service providers. These views contrasted with those working in the speciality. There was generally poor professional contact between GUM and other service providers involved in sexual health. Most indicated that greater levels of information and publicity, increased professional contact, and a broader range of services within GUM were important for future service development.
The response to the questionnaire strongly indicates that there is poor awareness of and consequently suboptimal use of the full range of services offered by GUM. Potential interventions to address this need include increased cross-speciality collaboration and targeting of specific groups of service providers involved in sexual health care. Important groups include hospital-based specialists and voluntary agencies as well as general practitioners. There is a clear need to project the broad range of sexual health services offered by GUM, and to emphasise the role of GUM in managing specific sexual health problems including several sexually transmitted infections.
评估英国一个大城市中卫生专业人员对泌尿生殖医学（GUM）服务的看法，并确定可能的变革干预措施。
向格拉斯哥一系列性健康服务机构的205名服务提供者邮寄了问卷调查表，这些机构包括GUM专科医生、护士和健康顾问。问卷包含有关GUM服务的组织和使用、形象和耻辱感评估的结构化问题，并询问了最有可能影响未来服务发展的因素。
从全市各个地区共回收了128份问卷。非GUM卫生专业人员对GUM服务的组织情况了解甚少。与其他性健康服务相比，GUM的形象不佳，且该服务被认为存在耻辱感。大多数非GUM服务提供者传统上仍主要将GUM视为少数几种特定性传播感染的转诊中心，而非全面性健康护理中心。一些服务提供者群体认为生殖器衣原体感染和盆腔炎在GUM转诊中优先级较低。这些观点与该专业领域的工作人员的观点形成对比。GUM与其他参与性健康的服务提供者之间的专业联系普遍较差。大多数人表示，更多的信息和宣传、更多的专业联系以及GUM内更广泛的服务范围对未来服务发展很重要。
对问卷的回复强烈表明，人们对GUM提供的全方位服务认识不足，因此使用也未达到最佳状态。解决这一需求的潜在干预措施包括加强跨专业合作以及针对参与性健康护理的特定服务提供者群体。重要群体包括医院专科医生、志愿机构以及全科医生。显然有必要宣传GUM提供的广泛性健康服务，并强调GUM在管理特定性健康问题（包括几种性传播感染）方面的作用。
