Behavioral intentions in sexual partnerships following a diagnosis of Chlamydia trachomatis.

OBJECTIVES To describe behavioral intentions regarding notification of sex partners and continuation of sexual relationships after a Chlamydia trachomatis diagnosis among women. METHODS Data are from a study of women diagnosed with C. trachomatis during 2005-2007 in Connecticut. Participants (n=135) reported their intentions to notify each of their sex partners in the past 3 months (n=187) of the infection and intentions to continue these relationships; generalized estimating equations were used to determine correlates of intentions. Reasons for these intentions were also described. RESULTS Participants intended not to notify 25% of sex partners; correlates were partnership duration and relationship quality. Participants intended not to continue 59% of sexual relationships; correlates included partnership duration, beliefs about partner's monogamy, and relationship quality. Intentions to notify partners and continue relationships were statistically associated (p=0.002). Non-mutually exclusive reasons for intending not to notify partners included no perceived need (46%), unwillingness to discuss the issue (43%), fear/discomfort with potential consequences (19%), and inability to locate partner (8%). Reasons for intending not to continue relationships were often related to the diagnosis (48%). CONCLUSIONS Sex partnership characteristics are the most salient correlates for intentions not to notify partners and continue relationships. Clinicians can identify those who are less likely to notify their partners and explore reasons for these intentions to promote behaviors to reduce further C. trachomatis transmission.

[1]  L. Anderson,et al.  Adherence to CDC STD Guideline Recommendations for the Treatment of Chlamydia trachomatis Infection in Two Managed Care Organizations , 2003, Sexually transmitted diseases.

[2]  K. Ethier,et al.  Knowledge of sex partner treatment for past bacterial STI and risk of current STI , 2005, Sexually Transmitted Infections.

[3]  J. Klausner,et al.  Patient-Delivered Therapy for Chlamydia: Putting Research Into Practice , 2003, Sexually transmitted diseases.

[4]  G. Hart,et al.  Qualitative analysis of psychosocial impact of diagnosis of Chlamydia trachomatis: implications for screening , 2001, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[5]  K. Holmes,et al.  Effect of expedited treatment of sex partners on recurrent or persistent gonorrhea or chlamydial infection. , 2005, The New England journal of medicine.

[6]  J. Fortenberry,et al.  Patient-Delivered Partner Treatment With Azithromycin to Prevent Repeated Chlamydia trachomatis Infection Among Women: A Randomized, Controlled Trial , 2003, Sexually transmitted diseases.

[7]  K. Tebb,et al.  Examination of the treatment and follow-up care for adolescents who test positive for Chlamydia trachomatis infection. , 2005, Archives of pediatrics & adolescent medicine.

[8]  D P Orr,et al.  Patterns of sexual partnerships among adolescent females. , 1996, The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine.

[9]  K. Holmes,et al.  Partner Notification for HIV and STD in the United States:: Low Coverage for Gonorrhea, Chlamydial Infection, and HIV , 2003, Sexually transmitted diseases.

[10]  J. Schwebke,et al.  Patterns of Chlamydia trachomatis testing and follow-up at a University Hospital Medical Center. , 1999, Sexually transmitted diseases.

[11]  Stuart Berman,et al.  Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health Sexually Transmitted Diseases among American Youth: Incidence and Prevalence Estimates, 2000 , 2022 .

[12]  C. Schofield Sexually transmitted disease surveillance. , 1982, British medical journal.

[13]  S. Emans,et al.  Partner condom use among adolescent girls with sexually transmitted diseases. , 1999, The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine.

[14]  K. Holmes,et al.  Partner notification for chlamydial infections among private sector clinicians in Seattle-King County: a clinician and patient survey. , 1999, Sexually transmitted diseases.

[15]  J. Warszawski,et al.  Sex difference in partner notification: results from three population based surveys in France , 2002, Sexually transmitted infections.

[16]  K. Holmes,et al.  To Notify or Not To Notify: STD Patients' Perspectives of Partner Notification in Seattle , 2000, Sexually transmitted diseases.

[17]  J. Fortenberry,et al.  The role of self-efficacy and relationship quality in partner notification by adolescents with sexually transmitted infections. , 2002, Archives of pediatrics & adolescent medicine.

[18]  S. Aral,et al.  Gap Length: An Important Factor in Sexually Transmitted Disease Transmission , 2003, Sexually transmitted diseases.