Kathy W Monroe1, Heidi L Weiss, Marga Jones, Edward W Hook. 1. Department of Pediatrics, Pediatric Emergency Medicine, Division of Infectious Disease, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama 35233, USA. kmonroe@peds.uab.edu
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine the acceptability of urine screening for Neisseria gonorrhoeae and Chlamydia trachomatis in adolescents in a pediatric emergency department. STUDY DESIGN: We used a prospective enrollment of adolescents aged 14-20 visiting an urban pediatric emergency department. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome measure was acceptance of urine STD screening rates. RESULTS: Of 1231 potential participants, 879 (71%) agreed to participate and 352 (29%) declined screening. Participants were similar to those refusing to participate in terms of gender. In multivariate analysis, age, race/ethnicity, and insurance status were associated with variation in sexually transmitted disease (STD) test acceptance, whereas the presence of a parent was not. Despite similar training, 1 of 3 recruiters had significantly lower acceptance rates than her peers. Overall, 10% of patients enrolled were found to have one or both infections. CONCLUSION: Urine screening for STDs can be efficiently conducted in an emergency department setting. This screening appears to be acceptable to most patients.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine the acceptability of urine screening for Neisseria gonorrhoeae and Chlamydia trachomatis in adolescents in a pediatric emergency department. STUDY DESIGN: We used a prospective enrollment of adolescents aged 14-20 visiting an urban pediatric emergency department. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome measure was acceptance of urine STD screening rates. RESULTS: Of 1231 potential participants, 879 (71%) agreed to participate and 352 (29%) declined screening. Participants were similar to those refusing to participate in terms of gender. In multivariate analysis, age, race/ethnicity, and insurance status were associated with variation in sexually transmitted disease (STD) test acceptance, whereas the presence of a parent was not. Despite similar training, 1 of 3 recruiters had significantly lower acceptance rates than her peers. Overall, 10% of patients enrolled were found to have one or both infections. CONCLUSION: Urine screening for STDs can be efficiently conducted in an emergency department setting. This screening appears to be acceptable to most patients.
Authors: Fahd A Ahmad; Donna B Jeffe; Katie Plax; Karen K Collins; Kenneth B Schechtman; Dwight E Doerhoff; Jane Garbutt; David M Jaffe Journal: Ann Emerg Med Date: 2014-03-06 Impact factor: 5.721
Authors: M A Chernesky; D H Martin; E W Hook; D Willis; J Jordan; S Wang; J R Lane; D Fuller; J Schachter Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2005-01 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: Erin E Bonar; Maureen A Walton; Martina T Caldwell; Lauren K Whiteside; Kristen L Barry; Rebecca M Cunningham Journal: J Emerg Med Date: 2015-05-04 Impact factor: 1.484