Back to Search Start Over

A randomized controlled trial of computer-assisted interviewing in sexual health clinics

Authors :
Mark Pakianathan
John Imrie
Syed Tariq Sadiq
Victoria Jones
Richard Gilson
John Richens
Ona McCarthy
P Hay
Kevin Miles
Andrew Copas
Patricia Kingori
Mortimer Market
UCL, STD Unit
St George's Hospital Medical School
London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM)
University College of London [London] (UCL)
Centre for Sexual Health and HIV Research, University College London
St. George's Hospital
Options UK
Social and Community Medicine School
University of Bristol [Bristol]
University of New South Wales [Sydney] (UNSW)
St Georges Hospital
Source :
Sexually Transmitted Infections, Sexually Transmitted Infections, BMJ Publishing Group, 2010, 86 (4), pp.310. ⟨10.1136/sti.2010.043422⟩
Publication Year :
2010
Publisher :
HAL CCSD, 2010.

Abstract

Objectives To assess the impact of computer-assisted interview compared with pen and paper on disclosure of sexual behaviour, diagnostic testing by clinicians, infections diagnosed and referral for counselling. Methods Two-centre parallel three-arm randomised controlled open trial. Computer-generated randomisation with allocation concealment using sealed envelopes. Setting Two London teaching hospital sexual health clinics. Participants 2351 clinic attenders over the age of 16 years. Interventions Computer-assisted self-interview (CASI). Computer-assisted personal interview (CAPI). Pen and paper interview (PAPI). Main Outcome Measures Diagnostic tests ordered, sexually transmitted infections (STI). Secondary Outcomes Disclosure of sexual risk, referral for counselling. Results 801, 763 and 787 patients randomly allocated to receive CASI, CAPI and PAPI. 795, 744 and 779 were available for intention-to-treat analysis. Significantly more diagnostic testing for hepatitis B and C and rectal samples in the CAPI arm (odds for more testing relative to PAPI 1.32; 95% CI 1.09 to 1.59). This pattern was not seen among CASI patients. HIV testing was significantly lower among CASI patients (odds for less testing relative to PAPI 0.73; 95% CI 0.59 to 0.90). STI diagnoses were not significantly different by trial arm. A summary measure of seven prespecified sensitive behaviours found greater reporting with CASI (OR 1.4; 95% CI 1.2 to 1.6) and CAPI (OR 1.4; 95% CI 1.2 to 1.7) compared with PAPI. Conclusion CASI and CAPI can generate greater recording of risky behaviour than traditional PAPI. Increased disclosure did not increase STI diagnoses. Safeguards may be needed to ensure that clinicians are prompted to act upon disclosures made during self-interview. Trial registration ISRCTN: 97674664.

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
97674664, 13684973, and 14723263
Database :
OpenAIRE
Journal :
Sexually Transmitted Infections, Sexually Transmitted Infections, BMJ Publishing Group, 2010, 86 (4), pp.310. ⟨10.1136/sti.2010.043422⟩
Accession number :
edsair.doi.dedup.....7b088291ede196cab4608274d2e4f2c6
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1136/sti.2010.043422⟩