PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The aim is to assess the evidence in support of home-based versus clinic-based screening for sexually transmitted infections. RECENT FINDINGS: Home-based screening for sexually transmitted infections has been shown to be a feasible approach for men and women from a variety of settings, including high-risk, low-income, and resource-poor communities. In recent studies, the testing rate with home-based screening was up to 11 times greater than the testing rate with clinic-based screening. For most individuals, self-collection and testing of urine or vaginal specimens at home was considered to be easy, acceptable, and often preferred over testing at a clinic. There is limited evidence with regard to the cost effectiveness of home-based versus clinic-based screening for sexually transmitted infections. However, a study from the United States concluded that home-based screening is cost saving. SUMMARY: Improvements in screening rates for sexually transmitted infections can be achieved with home-based screening methods. Making low-cost home test kits available may encourage at-risk young individuals with less access to clinic care, who may not otherwise be screened, to self-test for sexually transmitted infections.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The aim is to assess the evidence in support of home-based versus clinic-based screening for sexually transmitted infections. RECENT FINDINGS: Home-based screening for sexually transmitted infections has been shown to be a feasible approach for men and women from a variety of settings, including high-risk, low-income, and resource-poor communities. In recent studies, the testing rate with home-based screening was up to 11 times greater than the testing rate with clinic-based screening. For most individuals, self-collection and testing of urine or vaginal specimens at home was considered to be easy, acceptable, and often preferred over testing at a clinic. There is limited evidence with regard to the cost effectiveness of home-based versus clinic-based screening for sexually transmitted infections. However, a study from the United States concluded that home-based screening is cost saving. SUMMARY: Improvements in screening rates for sexually transmitted infections can be achieved with home-based screening methods. Making low-cost home test kits available may encourage at-risk young individuals with less access to clinic care, who may not otherwise be screened, to self-test for sexually transmitted infections.
Authors: Anna S Graseck; Gina M Secura; Jenifer E Allsworth; Tessa Madden; Jeffrey F Peipert Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2010-12 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: Hannelore M Götz; Jan E A M van Bergen; Irene K Veldhuijzen; Christian J P A Hoebe; Jan Broer; A J J Coenen; F de Groot; M J C Verhooren; D T van Schaik; Jan H Richardus Journal: Int J STD AIDS Date: 2006-12 Impact factor: 1.359
Authors: John Macleod; Chris Salisbury; Nicola Low; Anne McCarthy; Jonathan A C Sterne; Aisha Holloway; Rita Patel; Emma Sanford; Andrea Morcom; Paddy Horner; George Davey Smith; Susan Skidmore; Alan Herring; Owen Caul; F D Richard Hobbs; Matthias Egger Journal: BMJ Date: 2005-04-04
Authors: Robert L Cook; Lars Østergaard; Sharon L Hillier; Pamela J Murray; Chung-Chou H Chang; Diane M Comer; Roberta B Ness Journal: Sex Transm Infect Date: 2007-02-14 Impact factor: 3.519
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: Sheri A Lippman; Heidi E Jones; Carla G Luppi; Adriana A Pinho; Maria Amelia M S Veras; Janneke H H M van de Wijgert Journal: Sex Transm Dis Date: 2007-07 Impact factor: 2.830
Authors: Lisa M Williamson; Gordon Scott; Katy Carrick-Anderson; Kirsten Kernaghan; Graham J Hart Journal: J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care Date: 2007-07
Authors: J Leenen; C J P A Hoebe; R P Ackens; D Posthouwer; I H M van Loo; P F G Wolffs; N H T M Dukers-Muijrers Journal: BMC Infect Dis Date: 2020-12-04 Impact factor: 3.090
Authors: Muhammad S Jamil; Jane S Hocking; Heidi M Bauer; Hammad Ali; Handan Wand; Kirsty Smith; Jennifer Walker; Basil Donovan; John M Kaldor; Rebecca J Guy Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2013-03-04 Impact factor: 3.295