Filters
Availability
Publication Year
Resource Type
Faculty
School/Institute
Publication Search Results
Sort
Results per page
1 - 10 of 17
-
(2002)Journal ArticlePsychological adjustment in 90 women (30 carriers and 60 non-carriers) who had undergone genetic testing for mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 breast/ovarian cancer susceptibility genes was compared with that of 53 women who were not offered genetic testing. Women were assessed prior to genetic testing and 7–10 days, 4 and 12 months after carrier status disclosure using self-administered questionnaires. Compared with women not offered testing, mutation carriers had significantly higher breast cancer distress 7–10 days (t=2.80, P=0.005) and 12 months (t=2.01, P=0.045) post-notification. Non-carriers showed a significant decrease in state anxiety 7–10 days post-notification (t=2.27, P=0.024) and in depression 4 months post-notification (t=2.26, P=0.024), compared with women not offered testing. These data show that non-carriers derive psychological benefits from genetic testing. Women testing positive may anticipate a sustained increase in breast cancer distress following disclosure, although no other adverse psychological outcomes were observed in this group.
-
(2011)Journal ArticleObjective Three decades into the HIV epidemic and with the advancement of HIV treatments, condom and non-condom-based anal intercourse among gay men in resource-rich countries needs to be re-assessed. Methods The proportions of men engaging in a range of anal intercourse practices were estimated from the ongoing cross-sectional Gay Community Periodic Surveys in six states in Australia from 2007 to 2009. Comparisons were made between HIV-negative men, HIV-positive men with an undetectable viral load and those with a detectable viral load. Results Condoms play a key role in gay men's anal intercourse practices: 33.8% of HIV-negative men, 25.1% of HIV-positive men with an undetectable viral load and 22.5% of those with a detectable viral load reported consistent condom use with all male partners in the 6 months before the survey. Among HIV-negative men, the second largest group were men who had unprotected anal intercourse (UAI) only in the context of HIV-negative seroconcordant regular relationships. Among HIV-positive men, the second largest group was men who had UAI in casual encounters preceded by HIV status disclosure to some, but not all, casual partners. Conclusions A minority, yet sizeable proportion, of men consistently engaged in a number of UAI practices in specific contexts, suggesting they have adopted deliberate HIV risk-reduction strategies. While it is important that HIV behavioural prevention continues to reinforce condom use, it needs to address both the challenges and opportunities of the substantial uptake of non-condom-based risk-reduction strategies.
-
-
-
-
(2014)Journal ArticleObjectives With the increasing momentum to maximize the benefits of antiretroviral therapy (ART), better understanding of opportunities and challenges in increasing ART coverage and promoting early ART initiation is urgently needed. Key sociodemographic, clinical and behavioural factors associated with Australian HIV-positive gay men’s current nonuse of ART were systematically examined. Methods Data were based on 1911 responses from HIV-positive men who had participated in the Australian Gay Community Periodic Surveys (GCPS) between 2010 and 2012. Stratified univariate analysis and multivariate logistic regression were used. Results A majority of the participants were recruited from gay community venues and events and self-identified as gay or homosexual. On average, they were 44 years old and had been living with HIV for at least 10 years. Close to 80% (n = 1555) were taking ART, with >90% further reporting an undetectable viral load at the time of the survey. From 2010 to 2012, there had been a moderate increase in ART uptake [adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 1.40; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.20–1.65]. In addition, younger age (AOR 1.66; 95% CI 1.45–1.92), recent HIV diagnosis (AOR 1.78; 95% CI 1.59–1.98), not receiving any social welfare payments (AOR 2.20; 95% CI 1.05–2.54) and no annual screening for sexually transmissible infections (AOR 1.55; 95% CI 1.03–2.34) were independently associated with ART nonuse. Conclusions Current ART coverage among HIV-positive gay men in Australia is reasonably high. To further increase ART coverage and promote early ART initiation in this population, better clinical care and sustained structural support are needed for HIV management throughout their life course.
-
(2000)ReportThe Linked Care Trial was an innovative approach to linking health and community care services for people in need of ongoing care, established in 1996-97 in the municipalities of Hornsby and Ku-ring-gai in Sydney’s northern suburbs. The trial formed part of a national program of Coordinated Care Trials (CCTs) established in 1996 to test whether it was possible to coordinate the care currently provided by a variety of different health and community care services and practitioners using funds pooled from a number of Commonwealth and State programs. This flexible use of funding was to be managed by care coordinators (CCs) assigned to each participant, 1 using an individual care plan to help organise the medical care and social assistance that each would receive. The local evaluation of the Linked Care Trial was to test whether this approach could be practically implemented in the local community and, if so, to determine whether this led to a more effective use of existing resources with improved outcomes for participants and caregivers. This final evaluation report reviews progress with Linked Care and the evaluation from commencement of the Live Phase of the trial in 1997 to its formal conclusion in December 1999. Drawing on quantitative and qualitative data collected as part of the local evaluation, the report presents an analysis of findings with respect to a number of separate components of Linked Care. It also identifies the conditions which underlie the achievements of Linked Care and considers obstacles that constrained the achievement of trial goals or which could have affected the evaluation.
-
(2002)ReportThis document is the Final Draft of the Families First Outcomes Evaluation Framework, concerned with evaluating child, family and community outcomes. It is one of the evaluation activities for Families First. Others include process evaluation through Area Reviews of three Families First Areas in 2002-03, local Area evaluations and program evaluation of the projects funded through Families First. This outcome evaluation activity will inform the other evaluation activities. Overall the evaluation considers whether Families First has been effective in supporting families and communities in NSW to care for children using an early intervention approach and in developing linkages between specialised health, education, community and other policies. The Framework includes suggestions for minimum data collection and foundations for extending studies beyond the budget of the evaluation. A general aim in choosing the outcome indicators is to maintain compatibility with simultaneous program evaluation of similar NSW, Commonwealth and international programs.
-
(2000)ReportThe Linked Care Trial was an innovative approach to linking health and community care services for people in need of ongoing care, established in 1996-97 in the municipalities of Hornsby and Ku-ring-gai in Sydney’s northern suburbs. The trial formed part of a national program of Coordinated Care Trials (CCTs) established in 1996 to test whether it was possible to coordinate the care currently provided by a variety of different health and community care services and practitioners using funds pooled from a number of different Commonwealth and State programs. This flexible use of funding was to be managed by care coordinators (CCs) assigned to each participant, 1 using an individual care plan to help organise the medical care and social assistance that each would receive. The local evaluation of the Linked Care Trial was to test whether this approach could be practically implemented in the local community and, if so, to determine whether this led to a more effective use of existing resources with improved outcomes for participants and caregivers.
-
(2000)ReportThe Linked Care Trial was an innovative approach to linking health and community care services for people in need of ongoing care, established in 1996-97 in the municipalities of Hornsby and Ku-ring-gai in Sydney’s northern suburbs. The trial formed part of a national program of Coordinated Care Trials established in 1996 to test whether it is possible to coordinate the care currently provided by a variety of different health and community care services and practitioners using funds pooled from a number of different Commonwealth and State programs. This flexible use of funding was to be managed by care coordinators (CCs) assigned to each participant, using an individual care plan to help organise the medical care and social assistance that each would receive. The Evaluation of the Linked Care Trial was to test whether this approach could be practically implemented in the local community and, if so, to determine whether this led to a more effective use of existing resources with improved outcomes for participants and caregivers. This service provider experience thematic report reviews progress with Linked Care and the evaluation from commencement of the Live Phase of the trial in 1997 to its formal conclusion in December 1999. Drawing on quantitative and qualitative data collected as part of the Local Evaluation, the report presents an analysis of findings with respect to a number of separate components of Linked Care. It also identifies the conditions which underlie the achievements of Linked Care in this period and considers obstacles that have constrained the achievement of trial goals or which could have affected the evaluation. Service providers were integral to Linked Care as partners in Linked Care management, contributors to the fund pool, subcontractors of care coordination services and the providers of health and community care to the participants.