Literature DB >> 22941863

Re-screening Chlamydia trachomatis positive subjects: a comparison of practices between an STI clinic, general practitioners and gynaecologists.

Nicole H T M Dukers-Muijrers1, Genevieve A F S van Liere, Christian J P A Hoebe.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Re-screening after an initial positive test is a highly effective strategy to identify new Chlamydia trachomatis positive cases. Here, we evaluate adherence to international re-screening guidelines and the re-screening positive rates among sexual healthcare providers.
METHODS: Passive retrospective cohort data were obtained from our STI clinic (South Limburg, Netherlands) and from the public laboratory that performs the majority of C trachomatis tests (September 2006-September 2010) conducted in the eastern South Limburg area. We assessed trends in re-screening after 3-12 months among young (16-25-year-old) and older women and men and evaluated differences between providers using multivariate regression analyses.
RESULTS: The positive rates in C trachomatis screening varied from 2-9% depending on the type of provider. At the STI clinic, subsequent re-screening was performed in 33% (382/1144) of patients, and 19% of re-screening cases were positive (74/382). Similar rates were observed for gynaecologists (re-screening 30%, 54/178; re-screening positive rate 15%, 8/51); re-screening rates were lower for general practitioners (23%, 144/625, p<0.01), but the positive rate in re-screening was similar (17%, 25/144). At the STI clinic, the re-screening rate was higher for older females (p<0.01) and older males (p<0.01) than for young females. The re-screening rate for young male patients increased over time (p=0.04). General practitioners re-screened young women more often than young (p<0.01) and older (p<0.01) men.
CONCLUSIONS: Positive rates were high for all care providers when re-screening patients. However, re-screening practices are suboptimal and differ between providers, arguing for improved adherence to current C trachomatis control guidelines.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22941863     DOI: 10.1136/sextrans-2011-050467

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


  9 in total

1.  Barriers to and facilitators of partner notification for chlamydia trachomatis among health care professionals.

Authors:  Kevin A T M Theunissen; Pim Schipper; Christian J P A Hoebe; Rik Crutzen; Gerjo Kok; Nicole H T M Dukers-Muijrers
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2014-12-20       Impact factor: 2.655

2.  The added value of chlamydia screening between 2008-2010 in reaching young people in addition to chlamydia testing in regular care; an observational study.

Authors:  Geneviève A F S van Liere; Nicole H T M Dukers-Muijrers; Jan E A M van Bergen; Hannelore M Götz; Frans Stals; Christian J P A Hoebe
Journal:  BMC Infect Dis       Date:  2014-11-18       Impact factor: 3.090

3.  Repeat Chlamydia trachomatis testing among heterosexual STI outpatient clinic visitors in the Netherlands: a longitudinal study.

Authors:  Maartje Visser; Fleur van Aar; Femke D H Koedijk; Carolina J G Kampman; Janneke C M Heijne
Journal:  BMC Infect Dis       Date:  2017-12-20       Impact factor: 3.090

4.  Test of cure, retesting and extragenital testing practices for Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae among general practitioners in different socioeconomic status areas: A retrospective cohort study, 2011-2016.

Authors:  Juliën N A P Wijers; Geneviève A F S van Liere; Christian J P A Hoebe; Jochen W L Cals; Petra F G Wolffs; Nicole H T M Dukers-Muijrers
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-03-14       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Chlamydia trachomatis bacterial load, estimated by Cq values, in urogenital samples from men and women visiting the general practice, hospital or STI clinic.

Authors:  Juliën N A P Wijers; Christian J P A Hoebe; Geneviève A F S van Liere; Petra F G Wolffs; Nicole H T M Dukers-Muijrers
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-04-19       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  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

7.  Acceptance of Home-Based Chlamydia Genital and Anorectal Testing Using Short Message Service (SMS) in Previously Tested Young People and Their Social and Sexual Networks.

Authors:  Nicole H T M Dukers-Muijrers; Kevin A T M Theunissen; Petra T Wolffs; Gerjo Kok; Christian J P A Hoebe
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-07-31       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Detection of anorectal and cervicovaginal Chlamydia trachomatis infections following azithromycin treatment: prospective cohort study with multiple time-sequential measures of rRNA, DNA, quantitative load and symptoms.

Authors:  Nicole H T M Dukers-Muijrers; Arjen G C L Speksnijder; Servaas A Morré; Petra F G Wolffs; Marianne A B van der Sande; Antoinette A T P Brink; Ingrid V F van den Broek; Marita I L S Werner; Christian J P A Hoebe
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-11-20       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Design of the FemCure study: prospective multicentre study on the transmission of genital and extra-genital Chlamydia trachomatis infections in women receiving routine care.

Authors:  Nicole H T M Dukers-Muijrers; Petra F G Wolffs; Lisanne Eppings; Hannelore M Götz; Sylvia M Bruisten; Maarten F Schim van der Loeff; Kevin Janssen; Mayk Lucchesi; Titia Heijman; Birgit H van Benthem; Jan E van Bergen; Servaas A Morre; Jos Herbergs; Gerjo Kok; Mieke Steenbakkers; Arjan A Hogewoning; Henry J de Vries; Christian J P A Hoebe
Journal:  BMC Infect Dis       Date:  2016-08-08       Impact factor: 3.090

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.