BACKGROUND: Annual chlamydia screening is recommended for all sexually active women aged <25 years. Substantial limitations exist in ascertaining chlamydia trends. Reported case rates have increased likely due to increased screening and improved test technology. Other data suggest that prevalence has decreased. METHODS: Data from the Infertility Prevention Project (IPP), a national chlamydia screening program, were used to assess trends in chlamydia positivity from 2004 to 2008 among women aged 15 to 24 years who were tested in family planning clinics reporting data to IPP. Using the clinic as the unit of analysis, a correlated, longitudinal data analysis with a random intercept was conducted among clinics reporting ≥3 years of data during the analysis timeframe. Sensitivity analyses were performed to address the impact of various clinic participation levels in addition to the assessment of various correlation structures. RESULTS: Over 5 million chlamydia tests were reported to IPP family planning clinics from 2004 to 2008. A majority of tests were conducted among white women (clinic-specific mean: 63.2%, interquartile range: 37.6%-91.5%); the clinic-specific mean percent of tests conducted among black women was 17.9% (interquartile range: 0.8%-25.7%). Overall chlamydia positivity from 2004 to 2008 was 7.0%. The odds ratio associated with a single year change (1.00; 95% confidence interval: 0.99, 1.00) suggested that chlamydia positivity did not change from 2004 to 2008, after controlling for clinic-specific population factors (age, race, test usage, and geography). CONCLUSIONS: Findings support previous analyses suggesting that chlamydia prevalence is not increasing despite apparent increasing rates based on case reports.
BACKGROUND: Annual chlamydia screening is recommended for all sexually active women aged <25 years. Substantial limitations exist in ascertaining chlamydia trends. Reported case rates have increased likely due to increased screening and improved test technology. Other data suggest that prevalence has decreased. METHODS: Data from the Infertility Prevention Project (IPP), a national chlamydia screening program, were used to assess trends in chlamydia positivity from 2004 to 2008 among women aged 15 to 24 years who were tested in family planning clinics reporting data to IPP. Using the clinic as the unit of analysis, a correlated, longitudinal data analysis with a random intercept was conducted among clinics reporting ≥3 years of data during the analysis timeframe. Sensitivity analyses were performed to address the impact of various clinic participation levels in addition to the assessment of various correlation structures. RESULTS: Over 5 million chlamydia tests were reported to IPP family planning clinics from 2004 to 2008. A majority of tests were conducted among white women (clinic-specific mean: 63.2%, interquartile range: 37.6%-91.5%); the clinic-specific mean percent of tests conducted among black women was 17.9% (interquartile range: 0.8%-25.7%). Overall chlamydia positivity from 2004 to 2008 was 7.0%. The odds ratio associated with a single year change (1.00; 95% confidence interval: 0.99, 1.00) suggested that chlamydia positivity did not change from 2004 to 2008, after controlling for clinic-specific population factors (age, race, test usage, and geography). CONCLUSIONS: Findings support previous analyses suggesting that chlamydia prevalence is not increasing despite apparent increasing rates based on case reports.
Authors: Carolyn M Black; Jeanne Marrazzo; Robert E Johnson; Edward W Hook; Robert B Jones; Timothy A Green; Julius Schachter; Walter E Stamm; Gail Bolan; Michael E St Louis; David H Martin Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2002-10 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: S Deblina Datta; Maya Sternberg; Robert E Johnson; Stuart Berman; John R Papp; Geraldine McQuillan; Hillard Weinstock Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2007-07-17 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Sarah C Woodhall; Rachel J Gorwitz; Stephanie J Migchelsen; Sami L Gottlieb; Patrick J Horner; William M Geisler; Catherine Winstanley; Katrin Hufnagel; Tim Waterboer; Diana L Martin; Wilhelmina M Huston; Charlotte A Gaydos; Carolyn Deal; Magnus Unemo; J Kevin Dunbar; Kyle Bernstein Journal: Lancet Infect Dis Date: 2018-07-05 Impact factor: 25.071
Authors: Sarah C Woodhall; Lizzi Torrone; David Fine; Sarah G Salomon; Wendy Nakatsukasa-Ono; Kate Soldan; Hillard Weinstock Journal: Sex Health Date: 2015-11 Impact factor: 2.706
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