Advantages of chlamydia screening in general practice settings
Art & Science Previous     Next

Advantages of chlamydia screening in general practice settings

Elaine O’Connell Research associate, School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Health Protection Agency, Gloucester which is now part of Public Health England
Angela Hogan Project manager, Personalised Medicine Consortium, Integrated Biobank of Luxembourg, Health Protection Agency, Gloucester which is now part of Public Health England
Ellie Ricketts Project manager, Public Health England, Gloucester, Health Protection Agency, Gloucester which is now part of Public Health England
Jo Jacomelli Senior epidemiology, surveillance analyst, Public Health England, Bristol, Health Protection Agency, Gloucester which is now part of Public Health England
Cliodna McNulty Head of primary care unit, Public Health England, Gloucester, Health Protection Agency, Gloucester which is now part of Public Health England

Young people are mostly positive about sexual health being part of general health screening. Research by the Public Health England Primary Care Unit suggests that opportunistic tests should be offered on routine visits to GP surgeries

On average 60 per cent of men and 75 per cent of women visit their GP annually for a consultation. This makes GP practices an ideal setting for chlamydia screening but staff often feel that offering screening to young people could cause offence or anxiety. However, chlamydia has a high infection rate and is asymptomatic; therefore it is vital that people are screened to increase the diagnostic rate. This article explores barriers that prevent GP staff offering such screening and the views of young people about whether they feel offers of screening are appropriate.

Correspondence Elaine.OConnell@bristol.ac.uk

Primary Health Care. 23, 4,26-29. doi: 10.7748/phc2013.05.23.4.26.e710

Received: 09 October 2012

Accepted: 02 January 2013

Published in print: 01 May 2013

Peer review

This article has been subject to double blind peer review

Conflict Of Interest

None declared