Computer-assisted self interviewing in sexual health clinics

• Published in: Sexually transmitted diseases Vol. 37; no. 11; p. 665
• Main Authors: Fairley, Christopher K, Sze, Jun Kit, Vodstrcil, Lenka A, Chen, Marcus Y
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States 01.11.2010
• Subjects: Ambulatory Care Facilities; Australia; Computers; Diagnosis, Computer-Assisted - methods; Female; Humans; Interviews as Topic; Male; Medical History Taking - methods; New Zealand; Risk-Taking; Self Disclosure; Sexual Behavior - statistics & numerical data; Sexual Partners; Sexually Transmitted Diseases - diagnosis; United Kingdom; United States
• ISSN: 1537-4521
• DOI: 10.1097/OLQ.0b013e3181f7d505

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. 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." 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. The potential public health advantages of the widespread use of CASI are discussed.