Jessica Ladd1, Yu-Hsiang Hsieh2, Mathilda Barnes3, Nicole Quinn3, Mary Jett-Goheen3, Charlotte A Gaydos3. 1. Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA. 2. Department of Emergency Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA. 3. Division of Infectious Diseases, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Internet-based screening for vaginal sexually transmitted infections (STI) has been shown to reach high-risk populations. Published studies of internet-based screening for rectal STIs in women are needed. Our objectives were to describe the female users of a rectal internet-based screening intervention and assess what factors correlated with rectal positivity for STIs. METHODS: The website http://www.iwantthekit.org offers free STI testing via home self-sampling kits. Women could order vaginal and rectal kits, both containing questionnaires. Rectal and vaginal swabs were tested for Chlamydia trachomatis, Neisseria gonorrhoeae and Trichomonas vaginalis using nucleic acid amplification tests. Data were analysed from 205 rectal kits from January 2009 through February 2011. Self-reported characteristics of participants were examined, and correlates of rectal STI positivity were analysed. RESULTS: Of the 205 rectal samples returned and eligible for testing, 38 (18.5%) were positive for at least one STI. The women were young (mean age 25.8 years), mostly African-American (50.0%), and only 14.0% always used condoms. After adjusting for age and race, Black race (AOR=3.06) and vaginal STI positivity (AOR=40.6) were significantly correlated with rectal STI positivity. Of women testing positive for rectal STIs who also submitted vaginal swabs, 29.4% were negative in the vaginal sample. CONCLUSIONS: Internet-based rectal screening can reach populations that appear to be at high risk for rectal STIs (18.5% prevalence) and led to the diagnosis of STIs in women who would not have been diagnosed vaginally. Black race and vaginal STI positivity were highly correlated with rectal STI positivity. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.
BACKGROUND: Internet-based screening for vaginal sexually transmitted infections (STI) has been shown to reach high-risk populations. Published studies of internet-based screening for rectal STIs in women are needed. Our objectives were to describe the female users of a rectal internet-based screening intervention and assess what factors correlated with rectal positivity for STIs. METHODS: The website http://www.iwantthekit.org offers free STI testing via home self-sampling kits. Women could order vaginal and rectal kits, both containing questionnaires. Rectal and vaginal swabs were tested for Chlamydia trachomatis, Neisseria gonorrhoeae and Trichomonas vaginalis using nucleic acid amplification tests. Data were analysed from 205 rectal kits from January 2009 through February 2011. Self-reported characteristics of participants were examined, and correlates of rectal STI positivity were analysed. RESULTS: Of the 205 rectal samples returned and eligible for testing, 38 (18.5%) were positive for at least one STI. The women were young (mean age 25.8 years), mostly African-American (50.0%), and only 14.0% always used condoms. After adjusting for age and race, Black race (AOR=3.06) and vaginal STI positivity (AOR=40.6) were significantly correlated with rectal STI positivity. Of women testing positive for rectal STIs who also submitted vaginal swabs, 29.4% were negative in the vaginal sample. CONCLUSIONS: Internet-based rectal screening can reach populations that appear to be at high risk for rectal STIs (18.5% prevalence) and led to the diagnosis of STIs in women who would not have been diagnosed vaginally. Black race and vaginal STI positivity were highly correlated with rectal STI positivity. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.
Authors: Charlotte A Gaydos; Karen Dwyer; Mathilda Barnes; Patricia A Rizzo-Price; Billie Jo Wood; Toni Flemming; M Terry Hogan Journal: Sex Transm Dis Date: 2006-07 Impact factor: 2.830
Authors: Lin H Tian; Thomas A Peterman; Guoyu Tao; Lesley C Brooks; Carol Metcalf; C Kevin Malotte; Sindy M Paul; John M Douglas Journal: Sex Transm Dis Date: 2008-11 Impact factor: 2.830
Authors: Pamina M Gorbach; Lisa E Manhart; Kristen L Hess; Bradley P Stoner; David H Martin; King K Holmes Journal: Sex Transm Dis Date: 2009-04 Impact factor: 2.830
Authors: Charlotte A Gaydos; Mathilda Barnes; Mary Jett-Goheen; Nicole Quinn; Pamela Whittle; Terry Hogan; Yu-Hsiang Hsieh Journal: Int J STD AIDS Date: 2013-07-15 Impact factor: 1.359
Authors: Joshua D Trebach; C Patrick Chaulk; Kathleen R Page; Susan Tuddenham; Khalil G Ghanem Journal: Sex Transm Dis Date: 2015-05 Impact factor: 2.830
Authors: Claire S Danby; Lisa A Cosentino; Lorna K Rabe; Carol L Priest; Khrystine C Damare; Ingrid S Macio; Leslie A Meyn; Harold C Wiesenfeld; Sharon L Hillier Journal: Sex Transm Dis Date: 2016-02 Impact factor: 2.830
Authors: Tonia Poteat; Rebecca Hamilton White; Katherine H A Footer; Ju Nyeong Park; Noya Galai; Steven Huettner; Brad E Silberzahn; Sean T Allen; Jennifer Glick; S Wilson Beckham; Charlotte A Gaydos; Susan G Sherman Journal: Sex Transm Infect Date: 2020-05-04 Impact factor: 3.519
Authors: Alan G Nyitray; Vanessa Schick; Michael D Swartz; Anna R Giuliano; Maria E Fernandez; Ashish A Deshmukh; Timothy J Ridolfi; Christopher Ajala; Bridgett Brzezinski; Micaela Sandoval; Belinda Nedjai; Jennifer S Smith; Elizabeth Y Chiao Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2021-06-29 Impact factor: 2.692