Literature DB >> 22728910

High yield of reinfections by home-based automatic rescreening of Chlamydia positives in a large-scale register-based screening programme and determinants of repeat infections.

Hannelore M Götz1, Ingrid V F van den Broek, Christian J P A Hoebe, Elfi E H G Brouwers, Lydia L Pars, Johan S A Fennema, Rik H Koekenbier, Sander van Ravesteijn, Eline L M Op de Coul, Jan van Bergen.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: In a systematic internet-based Chlamydia Screening Implementation Programme in The Netherlands, all chlamydia-positive participants automatically received a testkit after 6 months to facilitate early detection of repeat infections. The authors describe participation in repeat testing and prevalence and determinants of repeat infection during three consecutive annual screening rounds.
METHODS: Data collection included information on testkits sent, samples received and results of laboratory tests at time of baseline test and retest; (sexual) behavioural variables and socio-demographic variables were assessed. Chlamydia positives were requested to answer additional questions about treatment and partner notification 10 days after checking their results.
RESULTS: Retest rate was 66.3% (2777/4191). Retest chlamydia positivity was 8.8% (242/2756) compared with a chlamydia positivity at first screening test of 4.1%. Chlamydia positivity was significantly higher in younger age groups (14.6% in 16-19 years, 8.5% and 5.5% in 20-24 and 25-29 years; p<0.01); in participants with lower education (15.2% low, 11.1% medium and 5.1% high; p<0.001) and in Surinamese/Antillean (13.1%), Turkish/Moroccan (12.9%) and Sub-Saharan African participants (18.6%; p<0.01). At baseline, 88.7% infected participants had reportedly been treated and treatment of current partner was 80.1%. DISCUSSION: Automated retesting by sending a testkit after 6 months to all chlamydia positives achieved high retest uptake and yielded a positivity rate twice as at baseline and can therefore be recommended as an additional strategy for chlamydia control. The high rate of repeat infections among known risk groups suggests room for improvement in patient case management and in effective risk reduction counselling.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22728910     DOI: 10.1136/sextrans-2011-050455

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sex Transm Infect        ISSN: 1368-4973            Impact factor:   3.519


  8 in total

1.  Rationale and design of REACT: a randomised controlled trial assessing the effectiveness of home-collection to increase chlamydia retesting and detect repeat positive tests.

Authors:  Kirsty S Smith; Jane S Hocking; Marcus Chen; Christopher K Fairley; Anna McNulty; Phillip Read; Catriona S Bradshaw; Sepehr N Tabrizi; Handan Wand; Marion Saville; William Rawlinson; Suzanne M Garland; Basil Donovan; John M Kaldor; Rebecca Guy
Journal:  BMC Infect Dis       Date:  2014-04-24       Impact factor: 3.090

2.  Get Checked… Where? The Development of a Comprehensive, Integrated Internet-Based Testing Program for Sexually Transmitted and Blood-Borne Infections in British Columbia, Canada.

Authors:  Mark Gilbert; Devon Haag; Travis Salway Hottes; Mark Bondyra; Elizabeth Elliot; Cathy Chabot; Janine Farrell; Amanda Bonnell; Shannon Kopp; John Andruschak; Jean Shoveller; Gina Ogilvie
Journal:  JMIR Res Protoc       Date:  2016-09-20

3.  The Netherlands Chlamydia cohort study (NECCST) protocol to assess the risk of late complications following Chlamydia trachomatis infection in women.

Authors:  B M Hoenderboom; A A M van Oeffelen; B H B van Benthem; J E A M van Bergen; N H T M Dukers-Muijrers; H M Götz; C J P A Hoebe; A A Hogewoning; F R M van der Klis; D van Baarle; J A Land; M A B van der Sande; M G van Veen; F de Vries; S A Morré; I V F van den Broek
Journal:  BMC Infect Dis       Date:  2017-04-11       Impact factor: 3.090

4.  What explains anorectal chlamydia infection in women? Implications of a mathematical model for test and treatment strategies.

Authors:  Janneke C M Heijne; Geneviève A F S van Liere; Christian J P A Hoebe; Johannes A Bogaards; Birgit H B van Benthem; Nicole H T M Dukers-Muijrers
Journal:  Sex Transm Infect       Date:  2016-12-16       Impact factor: 3.519

5.  A pill for the partner via the chlamydia patient? Results from a mixed method study among sexual health care providers in the Netherlands.

Authors:  Anita C Nanhoe; Maartje Visser; Jurriaan J Omlo; Anita J C M Watzeels; Ingrid V van den Broek; Hannelore M Götz
Journal:  BMC Infect Dis       Date:  2018-05-29       Impact factor: 3.090

6.  Study protocol of the iMPaCT project: a longitudinal cohort study assessing psychological determinants, sexual behaviour and chlamydia (re)infections in heterosexual STI clinic visitors.

Authors:  Daphne A van Wees; Janneke C M Heijne; Titia Heijman; Karlijn C J G Kampman; Karin Westra; Anne de Vries; Mirjam E E Kretzschmar; Chantal den Daas
Journal:  BMC Infect Dis       Date:  2018-11-13       Impact factor: 3.090

7.  Retesting for genital Chlamydia trachomatis among visitors of a sexually transmitted infections clinic: randomized intervention trial of home- versus clinic-based recall.

Authors:  Hannelore M Götz; Mireille E G Wolfers; Ad Luijendijk; Ingrid V F van den Broek
Journal:  BMC Infect Dis       Date:  2013-05-24       Impact factor: 3.090

8.  Frequency and risk factors for incident and redetected Chlamydia trachomatis infection in sexually active, young, multi-ethnic women: a community based cohort study.

Authors:  Adamma Aghaizu; Fiona Reid; Sally Kerry; Phillip E Hay; Harry Mallinson; Jorgen S Jensen; Sarah Kerry; Sheila Kerry; Pippa Oakeshott
Journal:  Sex Transm Infect       Date:  2014-08-06       Impact factor: 3.519

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.