Cjg Kampman1, Fdh Koedijk1, Hcm Driessen-Hulshof2, Jla Hautvast3, Ivf van den Broek4. 1. Public Health Service Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands. 2. Public Health Service West-Brabant, Breda, The Netherlands. 3. Department of Primary and Community Care, Radboudumc University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. 4. Centre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, The Netherlands.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study is to assess the effect of reminder text messages 6 months after the initial treatment on retest and chlamydia reinfection rates in young heterosexuals compared with a historical control group and to assess factors associated with both outcomes. METHODS: Heterosexual people (aged 16-23 years), testing positive for urogenital chlamydia, were offered a retest after 6 months. Participants received a text message reminder at 6 months after the initial chlamydia diagnosis. Rates of retest uptake and the result of the retest were analysed using Cox regression. Prevalence ratios (PRs) were calculated to identify factors associated with these outcomes. Furthermore, the retest rate was compared with the retest rate of a historical control group. RESULTS: 30.6% (253/838) of the study group returned within 5-8 months compared with 9.2% (140/1530) in the historical control group. Women and persons who were not notified for a sexually transmitted infection (STI) at inclusion were more likely to return for a retest. 20.4% (56/275) of participants had a chlamydia reinfection upon retesting. Reinfection was higher in participants reporting STI-related symptoms (PR 3.2, 95% CI 1.8 to 5.6) and in participants who were notified for an STI at retest (PR 5.3, 95% CI 2.4 to 11.5). CONCLUSIONS: A text message reminder appeared to have a clear, positive impact on the resulting retest rate. These results also indicate that retesting is necessary to identify chlamydia reinfections. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/
OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study is to assess the effect of reminder text messages 6 months after the initial treatment on retest and chlamydia reinfection rates in young heterosexuals compared with a historical control group and to assess factors associated with both outcomes. METHODS: Heterosexual people (aged 16-23 years), testing positive for urogenital chlamydia, were offered a retest after 6 months. Participants received a text message reminder at 6 months after the initial chlamydia diagnosis. Rates of retest uptake and the result of the retest were analysed using Cox regression. Prevalence ratios (PRs) were calculated to identify factors associated with these outcomes. Furthermore, the retest rate was compared with the retest rate of a historical control group. RESULTS: 30.6% (253/838) of the study group returned within 5-8 months compared with 9.2% (140/1530) in the historical control group. Women and persons who were not notified for a sexually transmitted infection (STI) at inclusion were more likely to return for a retest. 20.4% (56/275) of participants had a chlamydia reinfection upon retesting. Reinfection was higher in participants reporting STI-related symptoms (PR 3.2, 95% CI 1.8 to 5.6) and in participants who were notified for an STI at retest (PR 5.3, 95% CI 2.4 to 11.5). CONCLUSIONS: A text message reminder appeared to have a clear, positive impact on the resulting retest rate. These results also indicate that retesting is necessary to identify chlamydia reinfections. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/
Entities:
Keywords:
ADOLESCENT; CHLAMYDIA TRACHOMATIS; COMMUNITY SERVICES; EPIDEMIOLOGY (GENERAL); PUBLIC HEALTH
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
Authors: Ingrid V F van den Broek; Gé A Donker; Karin Hek; Jan E A M van Bergen; Birgit H B van Benthem; Hannelore M Götz Journal: BMC Fam Pract Date: 2017-12-20 Impact factor: 2.497
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
Authors: Anna Unutzer; Julia C Dombrowski; David A Katz; Lindley A Barbee; Matthew R Golden; Christine M Khosropour Journal: Sex Transm Dis Date: 2020-07 Impact factor: 3.868