L Caballería1, G Pera2, J Bernad3, S Canut3, E Navarro4, M Bruguera5. 1. Unitat de Suport a la Recerca Metropolitana Nord, Institut Universitari d'Investigació en Atenció Primària (IDIAP) Jordi Gol, Santa Coloma de Gramenet, Barcelona, España; Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBERehd), Barcelona, España. Electronic address: lcaballeria.bnm.ics@gencat.cat. 2. Unitat de Suport a la Recerca Metropolitana Nord, Institut Universitari d'Investigació en Atenció Primària (IDIAP) Jordi Gol, Santa Coloma de Gramenet, Barcelona, España; Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBERehd), Barcelona, España. 3. Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBERehd), Barcelona, España; Centre d'Atenció Primària Vilassar de Mar, Direcció d'Atenció Primària Metropolitana Nord, Institut Català de la Salut, Vilassar de Mar, Barcelona, España. 4. Centre d'Atenció Primària Cassà de la Selva, Institut d'Assistència Sanitària de Girona, Cassà de la Selva, Girona, España. 5. Unidad de Hepatología, Hospital Clínic, Barcelona, España.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate which of the three studied strategies is the most effective to detect new cases of Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections in primary care. METHODS: This is an observational, prospective, and multicentre study evaluating three strategies. Strategy 1: provide an explanatory letter to adults assigned to two primary care teams (PCTs), inviting them to have a blood test. Strategy 2: place posters and leaflets in PCTs advertising the possibility of laboratory tests. Strategy 3: reexamine HCV antibody test results in patients with hypertransaminasemia diagnosed within the last two years through electronic records, and determine anti-HCV status in undiagnosed cases. RESULTS: There were a total 598 participants (51% female with an average age of 50.6 ± 13 years). There were 238 people (4.1% of letters sent) in Strategy 1, 69 people (0.3% of potential participation) in Strategy 2, and 291 people (100% participation) from Strategy 3. One new case of HCV was found in both Strategy 1 and Strategy 2, representing a prevalence of 0.4 and 1.4%, respectively. Two new cases of HCV were found in Strategy 3, representing a prevalence of 0.7%. CONCLUSIONS: The three studied strategies for detecting new cases of HCV infection are ineffective, especially in regards to their cost and effort.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate which of the three studied strategies is the most effective to detect new cases of Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections in primary care. METHODS: This is an observational, prospective, and multicentre study evaluating three strategies. Strategy 1: provide an explanatory letter to adults assigned to two primary care teams (PCTs), inviting them to have a blood test. Strategy 2: place posters and leaflets in PCTs advertising the possibility of laboratory tests. Strategy 3: reexamine HCV antibody test results in patients with hypertransaminasemia diagnosed within the last two years through electronic records, and determine anti-HCV status in undiagnosed cases. RESULTS: There were a total 598 participants (51% female with an average age of 50.6 ± 13 years). There were 238 people (4.1% of letters sent) in Strategy 1, 69 people (0.3% of potential participation) in Strategy 2, and 291 people (100% participation) from Strategy 3. One new case of HCV was found in both Strategy 1 and Strategy 2, representing a prevalence of 0.4 and 1.4%, respectively. Two new cases of HCV were found in Strategy 3, representing a prevalence of 0.7%. CONCLUSIONS: The three studied strategies for detecting new cases of HCV infection are ineffective, especially in regards to their cost and effort.
Authors: S H I Hofstraat; A M Falla; E F Duffell; S J M Hahné; A J Amato-Gauci; I K Veldhuijzen; L Tavoschi Journal: Epidemiol Infect Date: 2017-09-11 Impact factor: 2.451