BACKGROUND: Prompt treatment of exposed partners is critical for preventing further transmission of chlamydia, reinfection, and sequelae among females. Patient-delivered partner therapy (PDPT) has been allowable in California since 2001; however, few data are available regarding PDPT use and treatment outcomes. METHODS: Eight family planning clinics participated in a partner services evaluation from 2005 to 2006. Females aged 16 to 35 years with chlamydia were interviewed to determine the partner service received and partner treatment outcomes; a subset of partners was also interviewed. Determinants of reported partner treatment were assessed using multivariate logistic regression. Selected medical records were reviewed to assess reinfection rates. RESULTS: Overall, 743 female patients disclosed 952 partners; 58% of whom were identified as steady partners. Reported partner services included concurrent patient-partner treatment visits (15% of partners), PDPT (19%), patient referral (55%), health department referral (0.1%), and no partner management (11%). On the basis of patient report, 82% of partners were notified and 54% received treatment. Of the 166 (17%) partners interviewed, 139 (84%) reported that they had received treatment, which correlated well with patient report. Reported partner treatment was higher for concurrent treatment visits and PDPT (79% and 80%, respectively) compared to patient referral (44%, P < 0.0001). Adjusted for clinic and relationship status, partners managed with concurrent treatment visits or PDPT were more likely to receive treatment compared with partners managed with patient referral (adjusted odds ratios, 3.5; 95% confidence interval, 2.1-5.8 and adjusted odds ratios, 4.3; 95% confidence interval, 2.6-7.2, respectively). Among the patients retested within 6 months after treatment, 18% were reinfected; reinfection rates did not differ by type of partner service. CONCLUSIONS: Although overall rates of reported partner treatment were low, concurrent patient-partner treatment visits and PDPT were associated with significantly higher rates of partner treatment. However, these methods may be underutilized in California family planning settings.
BACKGROUND: Prompt treatment of exposed partners is critical for preventing further transmission of chlamydia, reinfection, and sequelae among females. Patient-delivered partner therapy (PDPT) has been allowable in California since 2001; however, few data are available regarding PDPT use and treatment outcomes. METHODS: Eight family planning clinics participated in a partner services evaluation from 2005 to 2006. Females aged 16 to 35 years with chlamydia were interviewed to determine the partner service received and partner treatment outcomes; a subset of partners was also interviewed. Determinants of reported partner treatment were assessed using multivariate logistic regression. Selected medical records were reviewed to assess reinfection rates. RESULTS: Overall, 743 female patients disclosed 952 partners; 58% of whom were identified as steady partners. Reported partner services included concurrent patient-partner treatment visits (15% of partners), PDPT (19%), patient referral (55%), health department referral (0.1%), and no partner management (11%). On the basis of patient report, 82% of partners were notified and 54% received treatment. Of the 166 (17%) partners interviewed, 139 (84%) reported that they had received treatment, which correlated well with patient report. Reported partner treatment was higher for concurrent treatment visits and PDPT (79% and 80%, respectively) compared to patient referral (44%, P < 0.0001). Adjusted for clinic and relationship status, partners managed with concurrent treatment visits or PDPT were more likely to receive treatment compared with partners managed with patient referral (adjusted odds ratios, 3.5; 95% confidence interval, 2.1-5.8 and adjusted odds ratios, 4.3; 95% confidence interval, 2.6-7.2, respectively). Among the patients retested within 6 months after treatment, 18% were reinfected; reinfection rates did not differ by type of partner service. CONCLUSIONS: Although overall rates of reported partner treatment were low, concurrent patient-partner treatment visits and PDPT were associated with significantly higher rates of partner treatment. However, these methods may be underutilized in California family planning settings.
Authors: Mark R Stenger; Roxanne P Kerani; Heidi M Bauer; Nicole Burghardt; Greta L Anschuetz; Ellen Klingler; Christina M Schumacher; Julie Simon; Matthew Golden Journal: Sex Transm Dis Date: 2015-09 Impact factor: 2.830
Authors: Matthew R Golden; Roxanne P Kerani; Mark Stenger; James P Hughes; Mark Aubin; Cheryl Malinski; King K Holmes Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2015-01-15 Impact factor: 11.069