Literature DB >> 14743074

Rescreening for gonorrhea and chlamydial infection through the mail: a randomized trial.

Rachel Sparks1, Jennifer R L Helmers, H Hunter Handsfield, Patricia A Totten, King K Holmes, Jennifer K H Wroblewski, Cheryl Malinski, Matthew R Golden.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Rescreening patients after treatment of Chlamydia trachomatis or Neisseria gonorrhoeae infection has had high yield but low rates of participation. GOAL: The goal of this study was to determine if rescreening for gonorrhea and chlamydial infection in a largely urban sexually transmitted disease population would be more successful if individuals were given the option of submitting a specimen for testing through the mail. STUDY
DESIGN: We conducted a randomized clinical trial involving 122 patients of whom 62 were assigned to clinic rescreening and 60 were given the option of either mailing a specimen for testing or going to a clinic for rescreening.
RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients (45%) given the option of either rescreening in the clinic or through the mail and 20 (32%) assigned to clinic rescreening were rescreened within 28 days of enrollment in the study (odds ratio, 1.7; 95% confidence interval, 0.8-3.8). Of the 60 patients randomized to the clinic rescreening or mailing option, 11 of 18 (61%) who opted to mail in a specimen and 16 of 42 (38%) who chose clinic rescreening were rescreened within 28 days of enrollment (P = 0.10).
CONCLUSIONS: Although not statistically significant, this study indicates that mailed rescreening could be a successful method to increase rescreening rates.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 14743074     DOI: 10.1097/01.OLQ.0000109512.95959.ED

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sex Transm Dis        ISSN: 0148-5717            Impact factor:   2.830


  7 in total

Review 1.  Screening for sexually transmitted infections at home or in the clinic?

Authors:  Shirley L Shih; Anna S Graseck; Gina M Secura; Jeffrey F Peipert
Journal:  Curr Opin Infect Dis       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 4.915

Review 2.  Chlamydial and gonococcal reinfection among men: a systematic review of data to evaluate the need for retesting.

Authors:  Monica Fung; Katherine C Scott; Charlotte K Kent; Jeffrey D Klausner
Journal:  Sex Transm Infect       Date:  2006-12-13       Impact factor: 3.519

3.  From the NIH: proceedings of a workshop on the importance of self-obtained vaginal specimens for detection of sexually transmitted infections.

Authors:  Marcia M Hobbs; Barbara van der Pol; Patricia Totten; Charlotte A Gaydos; Anna Wald; Terri Warren; Rachel L Winer; Robert L Cook; Carolyn D Deal; M Elizabeth Rogers; Julius Schachter; King K Holmes; David H Martin
Journal:  Sex Transm Dis       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 2.830

4.  Rationale and design of REACT: a randomised controlled trial assessing the effectiveness of home-collection to increase chlamydia retesting and detect repeat positive tests.

Authors:  Kirsty S Smith; Jane S Hocking; Marcus Chen; Christopher K Fairley; Anna McNulty; Phillip Read; Catriona S Bradshaw; Sepehr N Tabrizi; Handan Wand; Marion Saville; William Rawlinson; Suzanne M Garland; Basil Donovan; John M Kaldor; Rebecca Guy
Journal:  BMC Infect Dis       Date:  2014-04-24       Impact factor: 3.090

Review 5.  Home-based versus clinic-based specimen collection in the management of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae infections.

Authors:  Luisa Fajardo-Bernal; Johanna Aponte-Gonzalez; Patrick Vigil; Edith Angel-Müller; Carlos Rincon; Hernando G Gaitán; Nicola Low
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2015-09-29

6.  Retesting for genital Chlamydia trachomatis among visitors of a sexually transmitted infections clinic: randomized intervention trial of home- versus clinic-based recall.

Authors:  Hannelore M Götz; Mireille E G Wolfers; Ad Luijendijk; Ingrid V F van den Broek
Journal:  BMC Infect Dis       Date:  2013-05-24       Impact factor: 3.090

7.  The acceptability and cost of a home-based chlamydia retesting strategy: findings from the REACT randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  K S Smith; J M Kaldor; J S Hocking; M S Jamil; A M McNulty; P Read; C S Bradshaw; M Y Chen; C K Fairley; H Wand; K Worthington; S Blake; V Knight; W Rawlinson; M Saville; S N Tabrizi; S M Garland; B Donovan; R Guy
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2016-01-28       Impact factor: 3.295

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.