Access to genitourinary medicine clinics in the United Kingdom

Abstract

Objectives:To assess the variability in time taken for a patient to be seen in a genitourinary (GUM) clinic in the United Kingdom having contacted that clinic by telephone and compare this with GUM physicians' expectations. Methods: A postal questionnaire was sent to lead GUM physicians asking when they thought patients with two specific clinical scenarios would be seen in their clinics. Following this, healthcare personnel contacted individual units posing as patients with the same clinical scenarios and asked to be seen as soon as possible. Results: 202/258 (78%) lead clinicians responded to the postal questionnaire. All clinics claimed to have procedures allowing patients with acute symptoms to be assessed urgently and estimated that such patients would be seen within 48 hours of the initial telephone contact. In 243 of 311 (78%) clinic contacts, the patient was invited to attend the clinic within 48 hours. For the remaining 68 contacts (22%) the patient could not be accommodated within 48 hours and, of these, 49 could not be seen for more than 1 week. Conclusions:No clinician estimated that patients with acute severe symptoms would be seen more than 48 hours after the initial telephone contact, but in reality, for 22% of the patient contacts this was the case. This study may well underestimate the diYculties the general public may have in accessing GUM services. We hypothesise that this situation could be ameliorated by establishing process standards and addressing issues of resource allocation. (Sex Transm Inf 2001;77:12-14)

An outbreak of early syphilis: cases from North Manchester General Hospital

“…4 The lack of success in locating and treating contacts results from the casual and often multiple nature of the sexual contacts. Multidisciplinary meetings with public health specialists, GUM consultants, voluntary and non-statutory gay men's agencies were convened in February 2000 and a campaign was launched in March 2000 to raise syphilis awareness in Manchester's "gay" village and among healthcare professionals.…”

A metapopulation modelling framework for gonorrhoea and other sexually transmitted infections in heterosexual populations

“…We also demonstrate how making small changes in parameter estimates changes the modelled incidence. Firstly, waiting times for accessing care for STIs in the UK were noted to have increased (Djuretic et al 2001;Foley et al 2001;Griffiths et al 2004) in the last decade. We modelled a 5-day increase for the duration of care-seeking incidence rate per 100 000 population incidence rate per 100 000 population (a) Distribution of high-activity individuals (f) and endemic incidence for pZ0.7, where p is the proportion of sexual partnerships formed exclusively with those from within the same subpopulation.…”

Effectiveness of a Risk-Based Visitor-Prioritizing System at a Sexually Transmitted Infection Outpatient Clinic

“…2,3 Our goal was to offer same-day access to all visitors. We achieved this by differentiating in type of service, thus preserving the low threshold of the clinic and avoiding the risk that persons send away would be lost for STI screening.…”

“…[1][2][3][4][5] The STI outpatient clinic of Amsterdam's Health Service offers free STI/HIV screening, counseling, and treatment. To increase the screening capacity while using similar resources, a visitor-prioritizing system was developed to provide 2 types of service.…”