Skip Navigation


Family Practice Advance Access originally published online on March 15, 2005
Family Practice 2005 22(3):280-286; doi:10.1093/fampra/cmh728
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
22/3/280    most recent
cmh728v1
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow E-letters: View responses
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Fairhurst, K.
Right arrow Articles by Glasier, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Fairhurst, K.
Right arrow Articles by Glasier, A.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author (2005). Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oupjournals.org

"Not that sort of practice": the views and behaviour of primary care practitioners in a study of advance provision of emergency contraception

Karen Fairhurst, Sally Wyke, Sue Ziebland, Peter Seaman and Anna Glasier

Division of Community Health Sciences (General Practice), University of Edinburgh, 20 West Richmond Street, Edinburgh EH8 9DX, UK

Correspondence to Karen Fairhurst; Email: Karen.Fairhurst{at}ed.ac.uk

Background. Advance supplies of emergency contraception (EC) were made available to women aged 16–29 through general practice and family planning services in Lothian, Scotland. Although this intervention was not associated with an overall reduction in abortion rates in Lothian, it was hypothesized that some general practices may have been more successful than others in promoting and delivering the intervention.

Objective. To investigate, using comparative case studies, whether, and why, some general practices were more successful in promoting and delivering advance supplies of EC than others.

Methods. Eleven purposively sampled general practices from the 97 participating in the intervention were studied. The number of packs of advance supplies distributed was recorded and distribution rates per 100 eligible women per practice calculated. 44 semi-structured interviews with staff were used to describe the mechanisms through which advance supplies were distributed and health professionals' views of the intervention.

Results. Distribution rates varied from 0.9 to 32.0 per 100 eligible women. Respondents described three mechanisms through which advance supplies were distributed: passive, reactive and proactive. Views about EC, and the suitability of their patient population for advance supplies, varied and configured specific practice contexts that facilitated or hindered the delivery of advance supplies. Favourable views and pro-active mechanisms were associated with higher distribution rates, less favourable or ambivalent views and passive delivery mechanisms with lower distribution rates.

Conclusion. If primary care professionals are to actively engage with a sexual health promotion agenda they need to develop appropriate interpersonal skills and address their values, attitudes and cultural competences.

Keywords. Emergency contraception, advance provision, primary care, case studies, professionals' views and behaviour.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


E-letters:

Read all E-letters

Views and behaviour of primary care practitioners in a study of provision of emergency contraception
K Malia, et al.
Family Practice, 16 Nov 2005 [Full text]

Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.