Computer-Assisted Self Interviewing in Sexual Health Clinics
Computer-Assisted Self Interviewing in Sexual Health Clinics
复制标题
DOI：
10.1097/olq.0b013e3181f7d505
复制
发表时间：
2010-11-01
影响因子：
3.1
通讯作者：
Chen, Marcus Y.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Fairley, Christopher K.;Sze, Jun Kit;Chen, Marcus Y.
背景资料：本综述介绍了已发表的关于什么构成核心性史的要素以及在性传播疾病诊所内使用计算机辅助自我访谈（CASI）的信息。我们检索了奥维德Medline从1990年到2010年2月使用的术语“计算机辅助采访”和“性”，并确定发表的文章的核心性史，我们用了“核心性史”这个词“结果：自1990年以来，3篇发表的文章使用了专家共识，正式的临床医生调查和德尔菲技术的组合，以决定什么问题形成一个核心的性健康史。来自4个国家的性健康史主要询问伴侣的性别、伴侣的数量（尽管时间段不同）、性行为的类型（口交、肛交和阴道）和避孕套的使用、怀孕意图和避孕方法。在美国、澳大利亚和英国发表的五项研究将CASI与性传播疾病诊所的面对面访谈进行了比较。一般来说，CASI比临床医生访谈更常见地识别出更高风险的行为，尽管研究之间存在实质性差异。CASI被认为是高度可接受的，个人认为它允许更诚实的报告。目前，有足够的数据来确定是否CASI结果在性传播感染的检测，诊断或治疗的差异，或者如果CASI提高性健康护理或其efficiency.Conclusions的质量：广泛使用CASI的潜在的公共卫生优势进行了讨论。
Background: This review describes the published information on what constitutes the elements of a core sexual history and the use of computer-assisted self interviewing (CASI) within sexually transmitted disease clinics.Methods: We searched OVID Medline from 1990 to February 2010 using the terms "computer assisted interviewing" and "sex," and to identify published articles on a core sexual history, we used the term "core sexual history."Results: Since 1990, 3 published articles used a combination of expert consensus, formal clinician surveys, and the Delphi technique to decide on what questions form a core sexual health history. Sexual health histories from 4 countries mostly ask about the sex of the partners, the number of partners (although the time period varies), the types of sex (oral, anal, and vaginal) and condom use, pregnancy intent, and contraceptive methods. Five published studies in the United States, Australia, and the United Kingdom compared CASI with in person interviews in sexually transmitted disease clinics. In general, CASI identified higher risk behavior more commonly than clinician interviews, although there were substantial differences between studies. CASI was found to be highly acceptable and individuals felt it allowed more honest reporting. Currently, there are insufficient data to determine whether CASI results in differences in sexually transmitted infection testing, diagnosis, or treatment or if CASI improves the quality of sexual health care or its efficiency.Conclusions: The potential public health advantages of the widespread use of CASI are discussed.