4.3 Article

Improving Access to Sexual Health Services in General Practice Using a Hub-and-Spoke Model: A Mixed-Methods Evaluation

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19073935

关键词

HIV; sexually transmitted infection; general practice; hub and spoke; primary care; sexual health

资金

  1. Victorian Department of Health and Human Services

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study evaluated the feasibility and impact of a hub-and-spoke model for improving access to sexual health services in three general practices in Victoria, Australia. The results showed a significant increase in testing for HIV and STIs post-implementation, as well as improvements in participants' knowledge and confidence in managing sexual health cases.
Improving access to sexual health services is critical in light of rising sexually transmitted infections (STIs). We evaluated a hub-and-spoke model for improving access to sexual health services in three general practices in Victoria, Australia. The primary outcome was the impact on HIV and STI (chlamydia, gonorrhoea, syphilis) testing. Segmented linear regression analysis was conducted to examine the trends in the total HIV/STI tests pre- (from January 2019 to June 2020) and post-implementation (from July 2020 to July 2021). We evaluated the feasibility and acceptability of integrating this model into the general practices using semi-structured individual interviews. There was a statistically significant rise in testing for HIV and STIs in all general practices: post-implementation, there was an increase of an average of 11.2 chlamydia tests per month (p = 0.026), 10.5 gonorrhoea tests per month (p = 0.001), 4.3 syphilis tests per month (p = 0.010), and 5.6 HIV tests per month (p = 0.010). Participants reported increases in knowledge level and confidence in offering STI testing and managing a greater variety of sexual health cases. This study demonstrates the feasibility of implementing a hub-and-spoke model to enable GPs to deliver sexual health care with support from a sexual health specialist service.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据