M Santer1, P Warner, S Wyke, S Sutherland. 1. Department of Community Health Sciences (General Practice), The University of Edinburgh, UK. miriam.santer@ed.ac.uk
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To study opportunistic screening in primary care, in such a way that would include teenage women. Setting-Screening for chlamydia infection was offered opportunistically in eight general practices in Edinburgh to women aged < or = 35 years attending for cervical smear, and women aged < or = 20 years attending for contraception. The numbers of women eligible to be offered screening were 901 in the cervical smear group, and 595 in the contraception group. RESULTS: Effective screening rate (offered test, consented, and urine sample returned) was 30% for the cervical smear group compared with 23% for the contraception group. Among those tested, chlamydia prevalence was strongly associated with young age, ranging from 11.8% in those <18 years, to 0% in those >25 years. Number of sexual partners in past year did not improve prediction of infection. CONCLUSION: These findings raise concerns regarding the feasibility of opportunistic screening in general practice, particularly for those with highest prevalence of chlamydia--teenage women.
OBJECTIVE: To study opportunistic screening in primary care, in such a way that would include teenage women. Setting-Screening for chlamydia infection was offered opportunistically in eight general practices in Edinburgh to women aged < or = 35 years attending for cervical smear, and women aged < or = 20 years attending for contraception. The numbers of women eligible to be offered screening were 901 in the cervical smear group, and 595 in the contraception group. RESULTS: Effective screening rate (offered test, consented, and urine sample returned) was 30% for the cervical smear group compared with 23% for the contraception group. Among those tested, chlamydia prevalence was strongly associated with young age, ranging from 11.8% in those <18 years, to 0% in those >25 years. Number of sexual partners in past year did not improve prediction of infection. CONCLUSION: These findings raise concerns regarding the feasibility of opportunistic screening in general practice, particularly for those with highest prevalence of chlamydia--teenage women.
Authors: Abiola Senok; Phil Wilson; Margaret Reid; Anne Scoular; Neil Craig; Alex McConnachie; Bridie Fitzpatrick; Alison MacDonald Journal: J Epidemiol Community Health Date: 2005-03 Impact factor: 3.710
Authors: J M Pimenta; M Catchpole; P A Rogers; E Perkins; N Jackson; C Carlisle; S Randall; J Hopwood; G Hewitt; G Underhill; H Mallinson; L McLean; T Gleave; J Tobin; V Harindra; A Ghosh Journal: Sex Transm Infect Date: 2003-02 Impact factor: 3.519
Authors: Jade E Bilardi; Christopher K Fairley; Meredith J Temple-Smith; Marie V Pirotta; Kathleen M McNamee; Siobhan Bourke; Lyle C Gurrin; Margaret Hellard; Lena A Sanci; Michelle J Wills; Jennifer Walker; Marcus Y Chen; Jane S Hocking Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2010-02-17 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Jade E Bilardi; Deborah L De Guingand; Meredith J Temple-Smith; Suzanne Garland; Christopher K Fairley; Sonia Grover; Euan Wallace; Jane S Hocking; Sepehr Tabrizi; Marie Pirotta; Marcus Y Chen Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2010-08-19 Impact factor: 3.295