Article Text

Download PDFPDF
STI services in the United Kingdom, how shall we cope?
  1. A R Markos
  1. Correspondence to:
 Dr A R Markos
 Department of Genito-Urinary Medicine, Mid Staffordshire General Hospitals, NHS Trust, Staffordshire General Hospital, Weston Road, Stafford ST16 3SA, UK;

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

The recent proposals/debate addressing the increasing genitourinary medicine (GUM) workload1 are imaginative. I wish to contribute the following observations.

  1. The listed “guiding principles” for the GUM services role are missing the most important function that is expected by patients: to exclude sexually transmitted infections. Casual sex, contact tracing, and sexual assault are examples of conditions that require full assessment.

  2. The revelation that some 9% of the sexually active population are harbouring asymptomatic chlamydial2 infection presents GUM physicians with a professional responsibility. Chlamydia screening will require extensive resources from primary care.3

  3. The debate ignores the issue of funding. To assume that GPs are going to provide “additional services” for a lower cost than GUM clinics, with …

View Full Text