Article Text

Download PDFPDF

Improving clinical practice and service delivery
P122 Management of sexual assault in the East Kent community
  1. M Abubakar,
  2. A Shakya,
  3. K Forey
  1. Kent Community Health NHS Trust, Kent, UK


Background Kent community health NHS Trust provides sexual health services (SHS) in East Kent serving an approximate population of 750 000 based in eight clinical sites. SHS see a significant number of sexual assault (SA) case referrals in this region as there is no designated Sexual Assault Referral Centre.

Aim This audit was conducted to determine if the management of SA cases in the services is in accordance to the standards outlined by British Sexual Health and HIV(BASHH) SA auditable outcome measures.

Method Case notes coded as SA based on a local code audited from the period of October 2010 to October 2011. Data were collected from the local SA proforma and case note documentation which identified information regarding victim's and assailant's profile and documentation of essential historical elements of SA. Other auditable outcomes measured included injury documentation, HIV risk assessment and post exposure prophylaxis (PEP) offer, police referral for crime and forensic examination (FME), self harm and child protection assessment. Data regarding emergency contraception, prophylactic antibiotics and hepatitis vaccination offered, testing for STIs and referral to EKRL were also collected.

Total no SA codes92:7 notes missing: total 85 cases
Source of referralsSelf: 59 (69.4%) Other: 26 (30.6%)
Time since SA54 (63.5%) seen within 6 weeks
Assailant detailsKnown: 51 (60.0%) Unknown: 34 (40.0%)
HIV risk assessment: 100%
Vaginal: 68 (81.9%) N=83
Oral: 11 (12.9%) N=85
Anal: 13 (15.3%) N=85
High risk: 13—2 eligible for PEP. Offered but declined
Referral for FMEYes 19 (22.3%) No 66 (77.7%) 10 (11.7%) had FME prior attendance
Referral to A and ENone
Emergency contraceptionYes 6 (7.0%) No 79 (93.0%)
Prophylaxis antibiotics for STDsYes 6 (7.0%) No 79 (93.0%)
Hepatitis B vaccination59 (69.4%) indicated 43 (72.9%) vaccinated
First visit testYes 64 (75.3%) No 21 (24.7%)
Repeat testYes 33 (38.8%) No 52 (61.2%)
Child protection assessment under 1618 (94.7%) N=19
Referral to police55 (64.7%) offered 5 (0.09%) declined
Referral to EKR lineYes 48 (56.4%) No 37 (43.6%)
Follow-ups offered59 (69.4%)
Total follow-ups seen40 (47.0%)

Conclusions This audit highlighted the importance of clear documentation of treatment and care offered and provided to victims of SA. Poor documentation of management is likely to underestimate the overall outcome of care offered, but when a treatment is indicated and initiated there is a good clear documentation. The local SA proforma is concise and user friendly for any trained and qualified healthcare individuals and covers all aspects of care as recommended by BASHH except for the self harm assessment which will be included upon revision. A close working partnership with local police, SHS and EKRL is essential to ensure the management of SA within the community is in accordance with national standards.

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.