Patient-initiated partner therapy (PIPT) for Chlamydia is not practiced in the Netherlands. We aimed to explore PIPT-willingness in patients infected with Chlamydia and persons notified for Chlamydia (partners) at sexual health clinics (SHCs) and general practitioners’ offices. We performed interviews among 20 heterosexual patients and 21 partners regarding real or hypothetical situations. The interviews were taped, transcribed verbatim and coded using ATLAS.ti7 software for qualitative research. Despite challenges in notifying partners in some cultural groups and some partner types, most patients and partners would cooperate with PIPT. Perceived barriers included unnecessary treatment, risking untreated other sexually transmitted infections and breaking the notification chain. Most patients and partners opted for home-based test-kits before treatment. Partners desired proper packaging of the test and the medication, along with an information insert, a supportive letter from the SHC, information on the internet and the possibility to contact a professional. Although PIPT may support partner notification (PN), many patients and partners prefer a diagnosis before treatment. PIPT with medication or a prescription combined with a home-based test-kit may be the way forward. However, PN seems to be influenced by type of partner and cultural background, requiring differentiated PN and partner therapy methods.
VisserMvan AarFOp de CoulELM, et al. Sexually transmitted infections including HIV, in the Netherlands in 2017. In: Visser MvAFvan OeffelenAAMvan den BroekIVF, et al. (eds) RIVM report.
Bilthoven:
RIVM, 2018, pp 69–82.
2.
HaggertyCLGottliebSLTaylorBD, et al.
Risk of sequelae after Chlamydia trachomatis genital infection in women. J Infect Dis2010;
201: S134–S155.
3.
HosenfeldCWorkowskiKBoumanS, et al.
Repeat infection with chlamydia and gonorrhea among females: a systematic review of the literature. Sex Transm Dis2009;
36: 478–489.
4.
GotzHMvan den BroekIVHoebeCJ, et al.
High yield of reinfections by home-based automatic rescreening of chlamydia positives in a large-scale register-based screening programme and determinants of repeat infections. Sex Transm Infect2013;
89: 63–69.
5.
FerreiraAYoungTMathewsC, et al.
Strategies for partner notification for sexually transmitted infections, including HIV. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2013;
10: Cd002843.
6.
GoldenMWhittingtonWHandsfieldH, et al.
Effect of expedited treatment of sex partners on recurrent or persistent gonorrhea or chlamydial infection. N Engl J Med2005;
352: 676–685.
7.
GoldenMRKeraniRPStengerM, et al.
Uptake and population-level impact of expedited partner therapy (EPT) on Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae: the Washington State community-level randomized trial of EPT. PLoS Med2015;
12: e1001777.
8.
EstcourtCSSutcliffeLJ.Accelerated partner therapy. Int J STD AIDS2008;
19: 870.
9.
EstcourtCSSutcliffeLJCopasA, et al.
Developing and testing accelerated partner therapy for partner notification for people with genital Chlamydia trachomatis diagnosed in primary care: a pilot randomised controlled trial. Sex Transm Infect2015;
91: 548–554.
10.
McBrideKRGoldsworthyRCFortenberryJD.Patient and partner perspectives on patient-delivered partner screening: acceptability, benefits, and barriers. AIDS Patient Care STDs2010;
24: 631–637.
11.
GoldenMREstcourtCS.Barriers to the implementation of expedited partner therapy. Sex Transm Infect2011;
87: ii37–ii38.
12.
SchillingerJAGorwitzRRietmeijerC, et al.
The expedited partner therapy continuum: a conceptual framework to guide programmatic efforts to increase partner treatment. Sex Transm Dis2016;
43: S63–S75.
13.
BorchardtLNPickettMLTanKT, et al.
Expedited partner therapy: pharmacist refusal of legal prescriptions. Sex Transm Dis2018;
45: 350–353.
TierneyW.Undaunted courage: life history and the modern challenge. In: DenzinNLincolnY (eds) Handbook of qualitative research. 2nd ed.
London:
Sage, 2000, pp.537–553.
16.
WolfersMde ZwartOKokG.Adolescents in the Netherlands underestimate risk for sexually transmitted infections and deny the need for sexually transmitted infection testing. AIDS Patient Care STDs2011;
25: 311–319.
17.
TemkinEKlassenACMmariK, et al.
A qualitative study of patients’ use of expedited partner therapy. Sex Transm Dis2011;
38: 651–656.
18.
SutcliffeLBrookMGChapmanJL, et al.
Is accelerated partner therapy a feasible and acceptable strategy for rapid partner notification in the UK?: a qualitative study of genitourinary medicine clinic attenders. Int J STD AIDS2009;
20: 603–606.
19.
MohammedHLeichliterJSSchmidtN, et al.
Does patient-delivered partner treatment improve disclosure for treatable sexually transmitted diseases?AIDS Patient Care STDs2010;
24: 183–188.
20.
PothoulakiMVojtGMappF, et al.
The “lexicon of love”: understanding types of relationships as primary context of STI transmission. Sex Trans Infect2017;
93: A83.
21.
VisserMvan AarFvan OeffelenAAM, et al. Sexually transmitted infections including HIV, in the Netherlands in 2016. In: Visser MvAFvan OeffelenAAMvan den BroekIVFet al. (eds) RIVM report.
Bilthoven:
RIVM, 2017.
22.
Op de CoulELGotzHMvan BergenJE, et al.
Who participates in the Dutch chlamydia screening? A study on demographic and behavioral correlates of participation and positivity. Sex Transm Dis2012;
39: 97–103.
23.
VojtGPothoulakiMEstcourtC, et al.
How can sexual history taking for sexually transmitted infection partner notification be improved?Sex Transm Infect2017;
93: A82.
24.
McBrideKGoldsworthyRCFortenberryJD.Formative design and evaluation of patient-delivered partner therapy informational materials and packaging. Sex Transm Infect2009;
85: 150–155.
25.
van AarFvan BenthemBHBvan den BroekIVF, et al. STIs in sex partners notified for chlamydia exposure: implications for expedited partner therapy. Sex Transm Infect 2018; 94: 619–621.
26.
GoldenMRHughesJPBrewerDD, et al.
Evaluation of a population-based program of expedited partner therapy for gonorrhea and chlamydial infection. Sex Transm Dis2007;
34: 598–603.
27.
McNultyATehMFFreedmanE.Patient delivered partner therapy for chlamydial infection – what would be missed?Sex Transm Dis2008;
35: 834–836.
28.
van den BroekIVFDonkerGAHekK, et al.
Partner notification and partner treatment for chlamydia: attitude and practice of general practitioners in the Netherlands; a landscape analysis. BMC Fam Pract2017;
18: 103.
29.
NanhoeACVisserMOmloJJ, et al.
A pill for the partner via the chlamydia patient? Results from a mixed method study among sexual health care providers in the Netherlands. BMC Infect Dis2018;
18: 243.
30.
GotzHMvan RooijenMSVriensP, et al.
Initial evaluation of use of an online partner notification tool for STI, called ‘suggest a test’: a cross sectional pilot study. Sex Transm Infect2014;
90: 195–200.
