Understanding access to sexual and reproductive health in general practice using an adapted Candidacy Framework; a systematic review and qualitative evidence synthesis

Background

General practice has a key role in reducing inequity in access to sexual and reproductive health (SRH). Unplanned pregnancy, abortion and STIs are increasing and disproportionately affects deprived communities and ethnic minority groups. The candidacy framework offers a practical, theoretical framework for understanding the complex interactional processes of access to SRH in general practice. Aim To use the candidacy framework to explore access of SRH in general practice. The seven interaction stages include, identification of need, navigation of services, permeability of services, appearing and asserting need, adjudication by healthcare professional, offers or resistance of offer and the local operating conditions or local production of candidacy. Design and setting This study involved a systematic review with qualitative evidence synthesis using a framework approach.

Methods

A systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, PUBMED, and the Web of Science was conducted to identify primary qualitative research studies exploring access to SRH in general practice from practitioner, public, and patient perspectives in countries with universal healthcare. The candidacy framework was used to synthesise the findings.

Results

Analysis of 42 studies revealed the impact of stigma, shame, and embarrassment among individuals, communities, and healthcare practitioners. Findings showed limited inclusion of demographics such as ethnicity and socio-economic status. Barriers to access were more evident for those from lower socio-economic communities, ethnic minorities and LGBTQ+. There are multiple barriers, which include the behaviours of healthcare professionals who have a crucial role in recognising an individual’s SRH need.

Conclusions

General practice offers a cradle-to-grave healthcare service, which should have SRH as a priority area of provision. Further understanding is needed of the impact of historic harms by medicine and healthcare on racialised individuals and gender minorities