Report

The effectiveness of sexual health interventions for people with severe mental illness: a systematic review

Authors: Kaltenthaler E, Pandor A, Wong R

Journal: Health Technology Assessment Volume: 18 Issue: 1

Publication date: January 2014

DOI: 10.3310/hta18010

Citation:

Kaltenthaler E, Pandor A, Wong R.The effectiveness of sexual health interventions for people with severe mental illness: a systematic review. Health Technol Assess 2014;18(1)


Journal issues* can be purchased by completing the form.


The cost of reports varies according to number of pages and postage address. The minimum cost for a copy sent to a UK address is £30.00. We will contact you on receipt of your completed form to advise you of actual cost. If you have any queries, please contact nihredit@southampton.ac.uk.


*We regret that unfortunately we are unable to supply bound print copies of Health Technology Assessment published before issue 12:31. However, PDFs are available to print from the "Downloads" tab of the issue page.

Responses

No responses have been published. If you would like to submit a response to this publication, please do so using the form below.

Comments submitted to the NIHR Journals Library are electronic letters to the editor. They enable our readers to debate issues raised in research reports published in the Journals Library. We aim to post within 2 working days all responses that contribute substantially to the topic investigated, as determined by the Editors.

Your name and affiliations will be published with your comment.

Once published, you will not have the right to remove or edit your response. The Editors may add, remove, or edit comments at their absolute discretion.

Post your response

Surname

Forename

Middle Initial

Occupation / Job title

Affiliation / Employer

Email

Address

Other authors

For example, if you are responding as a team or group. Please ensure you include full names and separate these using commas

Statement of competing interests

We believe that readers should be aware of any competing interests (conflicts of interest).

The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) define competing interests as including: financial relationships with industry (for example through employment, consultancies, stock, ownership, honoraria, and expert testimony), either directly or through immediate family; personal relationships; academic competition; and intellectual passion.

If yes, provide details below:

Enter response title

Enter response message

Enter CAPTCHA

Security key

Regenerate security key

By submitting your response, you are stating that you agree to the terms & conditions

  • Abstract

Abstract

Background

Severe mental illnesses (SMIs), such as schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, persist over time and can cause extensive disability leading to impairments in social and occupational functioning. People with SMI have higher morbidity and mortality due to physical illness than the general population and may be more likely to engage in high-risk sexual behaviour (e.g. unprotected intercourse, having multiple partners, involvement in the sex trade and illicit drug use), putting them at risk of poorer sexual health outcomes including sexually transmitted infections. Sexual health promotion interventions, developed and implemented for people with SMI, may improve participants' knowledge, attitudes, beliefs or behavioural practices and could lead to a reduction in risky sexual behaviour.

Objectives

To evaluate the effectiveness of sexual health interventions for people with SMI compared with usual care and their applicability to the UK NHS setting.

Data sources

Thirteen electronic databases were searched from inception to December 2012. All controlled trials (randomised or non-randomised) that met the following criteria were included: any sexual health promotion intervention or combination of interventions intended to change the knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, behaviours or practices of individuals with SMI (defined as adults aged 18 years who have received a diagnosis of schizophrenia or bipolar disorder) living in the community.

Review methods

A systematic review of the clinical evidence was undertaken following recommended guidelines. Data were tabulated and discussed in a narrative review.

Results

Thirteen randomised controlled studies met the inclusion criteria. The methodological quality of the included studies varied considerably, with only a minority of studies (n = 2) being considered as having very few methodological limitations. Despite wide variations in the study populations, interventions, comparators and outcomes, four studies showed significant improvements in all measured sexual risk behaviour outcomes (e.g. human immunodeficiency virus knowledge and behaviour change) in the intervention groups compared with the control groups. In contrast, four studies found significant improvements in the intervention groups for some outcomes only and three studies found significant improvements in certain subgroups only, based on either gender or ethnicity. Finally, two studies reported no significant differences in any sexual risk behaviour outcomes between the intervention and control groups. Moreover, positive findings were not consistently sustained at follow-up in many studies.

Limitations

Little detail was provided in the studies regarding the content of interventions, how they were delivered and by whom, making replication or generalisability difficult.

Conclusions

Owing to the large between-study variability (especially in the populations, interventions, comparators and reported outcomes) and mixed results, there is insufficient evidence to fully support or reject the identified sexual health interventions for people with SMI. In addition, there are considerable uncertainties around the generalisability of these findings to the UK setting. Further research recommendations include well-designed, UK-based trials of sexual health interventions for people with SMI as well as training and support for staff implementing sexual health interventions.

Study registration

PROSPERO number CRD42013003674.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme.

Publication updates

If you would like to receive information on publications and the latest news, click below to sign up.