Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Genitourin Med. 1991 Jun;67(3):215-9.

Women's health: potential for better coordination of services.

Author information

1
Birth Control Trust, London.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:

To determine the proportion of women attending a genitourinary medicine clinic (GUMC) who are in need of contraception and the proportion of women attending a family planning clinic (FPC) who may require screening or treatment for sexually transmitted disease (STD).

DESIGN:

Cross-sectional survey.

SETTING:

A large FPC (17,600 attendances by women a year) and a large GUMC (20,060 attendances by women a year) in an inner London health district.

SUBJECTS:

All clients attending the two clinics in consecutive weeks (356 GUMC and 335 FPC). In addition a non-random cluster of other women attending the same clinics later in the year were interviewed in depth (21 GUMC and 20 FPC).

RESULTS:

Of women at the GUMC 10.4% (95% CI 7.2-13.6) were at risk of unwanted pregnancy and not using contraception. Women aged under 20 years and women not registered with a general practitioner (GP) were more likely to be in this group. A further 13.8% may have been using contraception unreliably as they were not obtaining contraception from a GP or FPC. Of women at the FPC 1.8% (95% CI 0.3-3.2) complained of symptoms of genitourinary infection. In-depth interviews showed that some women assumed the staff at both clinics would counsel them in all aspects of sexual health.

CONCLUSIONS:

The opportunities presented at GUMCs to reduce the incidence of unwanted pregnancy and the opportunities presented at FPCs to reduce the incidence and prevalence of STD should not be missed.

PIP:

This study sought to determine the proportion of women attending a genitourinary medicine clinic (GUMC) who are in need of contraception and the proportion of women attending family planning clinics (FPC) who may require screening or treatment for sexually transmitted diseases (STDs). This cross-sectional survey conducted in an inner London health district focused on a large FPC (17,600 attendances by women/year) and a large GUMC (20,000 attendances by women/year). All clients investigated attended the 2 clinics in consecutive weeks (356 GUMC and 335 FPC). In addition, a nonrandom cluster of other women attending the same clinics later in the year were interviewed in depth (21 GUMC and 20 FPC). Of the women at the GUMC, 10.4% (95% CI 7.2-13.6) were at risk of unwanted pregnancy and were not using contraception. Women under age 20 and those not registered with a general practitioner (GP) were more likely to be in this group. A further 13.8% may have been using contraception unreliably since they had not obtained it from a GP or from the FPC. Of women at the FPC, 1.8% (95% CI 0.3-3.2) complained of symptoms of genitourinary infection. In-depth interviews showed that some women assumed the staff at both clinics would counsel them in all aspects of sexual health. The opportunities presented at GUMCs to reduce the incidence of unwanted pregnancy and the opportunities presented at FPCs to reduce the incidence and prevalence of STDs should not be missed.

PMID:
2071123
PMCID:
PMC1194675
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for PubMed Central
Loading ...
Support Center