Literature DB >> 21531771

Chlamydia control activities in Europe: cross-sectional survey.

Nicola Low1, Jackie A Cassell, Brenda Spencer, Nicole Bender, Adriane Martin Hilber, Jan van Bergen, Berit Andersen, Björn Herrmann, Françoise Dubois-Arber, Françoise F Hamers, Marita van de Laar, Judith M Stephenson.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Chlamydia is the most commonly reported bacterial sexually transmitted infection in Europe. The objective of the Screening for Chlamydia in Europe (SCREen) project was to describe current and planned chlamydia control activities in Europe.
METHODS: The authors sent a questionnaire asking about different aspects of chlamydia epidemiology and control to public health and clinical experts in each country in 2007. The principles of sexually transmitted infection control were used to develop a typology comprising five categories of chlamydia control activities. Each country was assigned to a category, based on responses to the questionnaire.
RESULTS: Experts in 29 of 33 (88%) invited countries responded. Thirteen of 29 countries (45%) had no current chlamydia control activities. Six countries in this group stated that there were plans to introduce chlamydia screening programmes. There were five countries (17%) with case management guidelines only. Three countries (10%) also recommended case finding amongst partners of diagnosed chlamydia cases or people with another sexually transmitted infection. Six countries (21%) further specified groups of asymptomatic people eligible for opportunistic chlamydia testing. Two countries (7%) reported a chlamydia screening programme. There was no consistent association between the per capita gross domestic product of a country and the intensity of chlamydia control activities (P = 0.816).
CONCLUSION: A newly developed classification system allowed the breadth of ongoing national chlamydia control activities to be described and categorized. Chlamydia control strategies should ensure that clinical guidelines to optimize chlamydia diagnosis and case management have been implemented before considering the appropriateness of screening programmes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21531771     DOI: 10.1093/eurpub/ckr046

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Public Health        ISSN: 1101-1262            Impact factor:   3.367


  23 in total

1.  In contrast to Chlamydia trachomatis, Waddlia chondrophila grows in human cells without inhibiting apoptosis, fragmenting the Golgi apparatus, or diverting post-Golgi sphingomyelin transport.

Authors:  Stephanie Dille; Eva-Maria Kleinschnitz; Collins Waguia Kontchou; Thilo Nölke; Georg Häcker
Journal:  Infect Immun       Date:  2015-06-08       Impact factor: 3.441

Review 2.  Screening for genital chlamydia infection.

Authors:  Nicola Low; Shelagh Redmond; Anneli Uusküla; Jan van Bergen; Helen Ward; Berit Andersen; Hannelore Götz
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2016-09-13

3.  Associated factors of willingness to undergo routine chlamydia trachomatis screening among hospital-based patients in Shenzhen, China: a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Rongxing Weng; Fuchang Hong; Chunlai Zhang; Lizhang Wen; Xiangsheng Chen; Yumao Cai
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2020-11-16       Impact factor: 3.295

4.  Do Australian general practitioners believe practice nurses can take a role in chlamydia testing? A qualitative study of attitudes and opinions.

Authors:  Rebecca Lorch; Jane Hocking; Rebecca Guy; Alaina Vaisey; Anna Wood; Basil Donovan; Christopher Fairley; Jane Gunn; John Kaldor; Meredith Temple-Smith
Journal:  BMC Infect Dis       Date:  2015-01-31       Impact factor: 3.090

5.  Practice nurse chlamydia testing in Australian general practice: a qualitative study of benefits, barriers and facilitators.

Authors:  Rebecca Lorch; Jane Hocking; Rebecca Guy; Alaina Vaisey; Anna Wood; Dyani Lewis; Meredith Temple-Smith
Journal:  BMC Fam Pract       Date:  2015-03-14       Impact factor: 2.497

Review 6.  Ectopic pregnancy secondary to in vitro fertilisation-embryo transfer: pathogenic mechanisms and management strategies.

Authors:  Bassem Refaat; Elizabeth Dalton; William L Ledger
Journal:  Reprod Biol Endocrinol       Date:  2015-04-12       Impact factor: 5.211

7.  Impact and cost-effectiveness of chlamydia testing in Scotland: a mathematical modelling study.

Authors:  Katharine J Looker; Lesley A Wallace; Katherine M E Turner
Journal:  Theor Biol Med Model       Date:  2015-01-15       Impact factor: 2.432

8.  Toward global prevention of sexually transmitted infections (STIs): the need for STI vaccines.

Authors:  Sami L Gottlieb; Nicola Low; Lori M Newman; Gail Bolan; Mary Kamb; Nathalie Broutet
Journal:  Vaccine       Date:  2014-02-25       Impact factor: 3.641

Review 9.  Socioeconomic factors and other sources of variation in the prevalence of genital chlamydia infections: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Joanna Crichton; Matthew Hickman; Rona Campbell; Harriet Batista-Ferrer; John Macleod
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2015-07-30       Impact factor: 3.295

10.  Young men's views toward the barriers and facilitators of Internet-based Chlamydia trachomatis screening: qualitative study.

Authors:  Karen Lorimer; Lisa McDaid
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2013-12-03       Impact factor: 5.428

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.