
%0 Journal Article
%A Pavlin, N. 
%A Parker, R. 
%A Hopkins, C. A. 
%A Temple-Smith, M. J. 
%A Fairley, C. K. 
%A Hocking, J. 
%A Russell, D. 
%A Bowden, F. 
%A Tomnay, J. E. 
%A Pitts, M. K. 
%A Chen, M. Y. 
%T 61. GP PERSPECTIVES ON PARTNER NOTIFICATION FOR CHLAMYDIA
%J Sexual Health
%D 2007/11/08
%V 4
%N 4
%P 308-308
%K 
%R https://doi.org/10.1071/SHV4N4AB61
%U https://www.publish.csiro.au/paper/SHV4N4AB61 
%X As part of a larger, combined qualitative-quantitative study of partner notification, 40 semi-structured in-depth telephone interviews were conducted with General Practitioners (GPs), from Victoria, ACT and Queensland, who had diagnosed at least one case of chlamydia in the last year. Rural doctors and those who had experience working with Aboriginal patients were over-sampled to ensure their views were represented in the study. The interviews explored GPs&#39; current practices with regard to partner notification for chlamydia, barriers they perceived to partner notification for chlamydia in the general practice setting and what resources/incentives they felt would improve partner notification for chlamydia. The GPs in our study primarily ask the index patient to carry out partner notification themselves. It was relatively rare for GPs to have experience of notifying partners on the patient&#39;s behalf. Half of the GPs report that they only encourage notification of the patient&#39;s current/immediate past partners. There was considerable confusion amongst the GPs interviewed as to the role of government partner notification officers. Many thought that support from a government agency would allow partner notification to occur more effectively. Some were under the impression that this process is automatically activated when they &#39;notify&#39; that they have diagnosed someone with chlamydia. Some of the main barriers perceived include confusion about issues of privacy and confidentiality with regard to partner notification and the sense that there is a lack of clarity as to what is expected of them in terms of partner notification for chlamydia. Most GPs feel that access to decision support tools and clear guidelines would be helpful. Financial incentives for doing partner notification were seen as particularly important to fund allied health workers&#39; time rather than to pay GPs themselves e.g. for practice nurses and Aboriginal health workers. GPs were enthusiastic about computer based resources to aid in partner notification 
