Literature DB >> 21173720

Chlamydia trachomatis age-specific prevalence in women who used an internet-based self-screening program compared to women who were screened in family planning clinics.

Charlotte A Gaydos1, Mathilda Barnes, Bulbul Aumakhan, Nicole Quinn, Catherine Wright, Patricia Agreda, Pamela Whittle, Terry Hogan.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether women who collect self-collected vaginal swabs at home demonstrated a higher positivity of Chlamydia trachomatis than women in family planning clinics.
METHODS: Collection kits for vaginal swabs were internet requested, collected at home, and mailed to a laboratory for testing; questionnaires were completed about acceptability and sexual risk history. Infected women received treatment at participating clinics. Age-specific prevalences were compared to those from family planning clinics.
RESULTS: Chlamydia positivity was 10.3% for 1171 females mailing swabs; prevalences ranged from 3.3% to 5.5% in family planning. Positivity for internet age groups was much higher than those for family planning age groups. The positivity for internet participants ranged from a low of 4.4% in Baltimore in 2005 to a high of 15.2% Baltimore in 2007. Family planning clinic prevalence in Baltimore and Maryland ranged from a low of 3.3% in Baltimore in 2006 to a high of 5.5% in Baltimore in 2008. The median age for all years for internet users in Baltimore and Maryland combined was 23 years; the median age for all years for attendees to family planning clinics who had chlamydia testing performed was 23 years.
CONCLUSIONS: Internet recruited women demonstrated higher positivity of chlamydia than those in family planning, providing new options for chlamydia screening programs.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21173720      PMCID: PMC3187773          DOI: 10.1097/OLQ.0b013e3182039d7f

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


  17 in total

1.  Seeking help from the internet during adolescence.

Authors:  Madelyn S Gould; Jimmie Lou Harris Munfakh; Keri Lubell; Marjorie Kleinman; Sarah Parker
Journal:  J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 8.829

2.  ACOG Committee Opinion #301: Sexually transmitted diseases in adolescents.

Authors: 
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 7.661

3.  Adolescent cybersurfing for health information: a new resource that crosses barriers.

Authors:  D L Borzekowski; V I Rickert
Journal:  Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med       Date:  2001-07

4.  STD screening, testing, case reporting, and clinical and partner notification practices: a national survey of US physicians.

Authors:  Janet S St Lawrence; Daniel E Montaño; Danuta Kasprzyk; William R Phillips; Keira Armstrong; Jami S Leichliter
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 9.308

5.  Female prisoners' preferences of collection methods for testing for Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae infection.

Authors:  Sara B Newman; Michael B Nelson; Charlotte A Gaydos; Heidi B Friedman
Journal:  Sex Transm Dis       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 2.830

6.  The Internet as a newly emerging risk environment for sexually transmitted diseases.

Authors:  M McFarlane; S S Bull; C A Rietmeijer
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2000-07-26       Impact factor: 56.272

7.  Home screening for chlamydial genital infection: is it acceptable to young men and women?

Authors:  J Stephenson; C Carder; A Copas; A Robinson; G Ridgway; A Haines
Journal:  Sex Transm Infect       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 3.519

8.  Improving participation in Chlamydia screening programs: perspectives of high-risk youth.

Authors:  Diane R Blake; Margaret H Kearney; J Michael Oakes; Susan K Druker; Roger Bibace
Journal:  Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med       Date:  2003-06

9.  Escaping or connecting? Characteristics of youth who form close online relationships.

Authors:  Janis Wolak; Kimberly J Mitchell; David Finkelhor
Journal:  J Adolesc       Date:  2003-02

10.  Preference among female Army recruits for use of self-administrated vaginal swabs or urine to screen for Chlamydia trachomatis genital infections.

Authors:  Y-H Hsieh; M R Howell; J C Gaydos; K T McKee; T C Quinn; C A Gaydos
Journal:  Sex Transm Dis       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 2.830

View more
  10 in total

Review 1.  Nanotechnology-based drug delivery systems for control of microbial biofilms: a review.

Authors:  Matheus Aparecido Dos Santos Ramos; Patrícia Bento Da Silva; Larissa Spósito; Luciani Gaspar De Toledo; Bruna Vidal Bonifácio; Camila Fernanda Rodero; Karen Cristina Dos Santos; Marlus Chorilli; Taís Maria Bauab
Journal:  Int J Nanomedicine       Date:  2018-02-27

Review 2.  Bacterial Sexually Transmitted Disease Screening Outside the Clinic--Implications for the Modern Sexually Transmitted Disease Program.

Authors:  Kyle T Bernstein; Joan M Chow; Preeti Pathela; Thomas L Gift
Journal:  Sex Transm Dis       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 2.830

3.  Characteristics and predictors of women who obtain rescreening for sexually transmitted infections using the www.iwantthekit.org screening programme.

Authors:  Charlotte A Gaydos; Mathilda Barnes; Mary Jett-Goheen; Nicole Quinn; Pamela Whittle; Terry Hogan; Yu-Hsiang Hsieh
Journal:  Int J STD AIDS       Date:  2013-07-15       Impact factor: 1.359

4.  Internet-based HIV and sexually transmitted infection testing in British Columbia, Canada: opinions and expectations of prospective clients.

Authors:  Travis Salway Hottes; Janine Farrell; Mark Bondyra; Devon Haag; Jean Shoveller; Mark Gilbert
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2012-03-06       Impact factor: 5.428

5.  Gonorrhea infection in women: prevalence, effects, screening, and management.

Authors:  Cheryl K Walker; Richard L Sweet
Journal:  Int J Womens Health       Date:  2011-07-19

6.  Use of GetCheckedOnline, a Comprehensive Web-based Testing Service for Sexually Transmitted and Blood-Borne Infections.

Authors:  Mark Gilbert; Travis Salway; Devon Haag; Christopher K Fairley; Jason Wong; Troy Grennan; Zhaida Uddin; Christopher S Buchner; Tom Wong; Mel Krajden; Mark Tyndall; Jean Shoveller; Gina Ogilvie
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2017-03-20       Impact factor: 5.428

7.  Self-collection of samples as an additional approach to deliver testing services for sexually transmitted infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Yasmin Ogale; Ping Teresa Yeh; Caitlin E Kennedy; Igor Toskin; Manjulaa Narasimhan
Journal:  BMJ Glob Health       Date:  2019-04-22

Review 8.  Direct Access for Patients to Diagnostic Testing and Results Using eHealth: Systematic Review on eHealth and Diagnostics.

Authors:  Anke Versluis; Kyma Schnoor; Niels H Chavannes; Esther Pwa Talboom-Kamp
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2022-01-12       Impact factor: 5.428

Review 9.  Home-based chlamydia and gonorrhoea screening: a systematic review of strategies and outcomes.

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

10.  Anticipating the potential for positive uptake and adaptation in the implementation of a publicly funded online STBBI testing service: a qualitative analysis.

Authors:  Cathy Chabot; Mark Gilbert; Devon Haag; Gina Ogilvie; Penelope Hawe; Vicky Bungay; Jean A Shoveller
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2018-01-30       Impact factor: 2.655

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.