Premium
Notification of infectious diseases by general practitioners in New South Wales: Survey before and after the introduction of the Public Health Act 1991 (NSW)
Author(s) -
Bek Mark D,
Lonie Cait E,
Levy Michael H
Publication year - 1994
Publication title -
medical journal of australia
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.904
H-Index - 131
eISSN - 1326-5377
pISSN - 0025-729X
DOI - 10.5694/j.1326-5377.1994.tb127598.x
Subject(s) - preventive action , medicine , infectious disease (medical specialty) , public health , family medicine , partner notification , notification system , environmental health , disease , medical emergency , nursing , pathology , computer network , software engineering , syphilis , human immunodeficiency virus (hiv) , computer science , engineering
Objective To evaluate attitudes and knowledge about infectious disease notification and the self‐reported notifying practices of general practitioners in New South Wales before and after the introduction of the Public Health Act 1991 (NSW). Design A survey of a random sample of general practitioners in NSW before and after the introduction of the Act. Results The percentage of doctors who considered notification to be very important increased (57% “before” v. 67% “after”; P= 0.02), as did the percentage who believed that notification usually leads to preventive action (41% v. 54%; P = 0.04). There was no increase in self‐reported notification (50% v. 54% who reported notifying cases of notifiable diseases “always, or almost always”; P = 0.42). Conclusions Notification of infectious disease by doctors remains suboptimal, but may improve over time as the impact of the new Act is felt. Feedback to doctors showing that preventive action is taken as a result of their notifications may be the most effective way to improve notification practices.