Literature DB >> 29634599

Comparison of Algorithms to Triage Patients to Express Care in a Sexually Transmitted Disease Clinic.

Laura C Chambers1, Lisa E Manhart, David A Katz, Matthew R Golden, Lindley A Barbee, Julia C Dombrowski.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The ideal approach to triaging sexually transmitted disease (STD) clinic patients between testing-only express visits and standard visits with clinician evaluation is uncertain.
METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, we used classification and regression tree analysis to develop and validate the optimal algorithm for predicting which patients need a standard visit with clinician assessment (i.e., to maximize correct triage). Using electronic medical record data, we defined patients as needing a standard visit if they reported STD symptoms, received any empiric treatment, or were diagnosed as having an infection or syndrome at the same visit. We considered 11 potential predictors for requiring medical evaluation collected via computer-assisted self-interview when constructing the optimized algorithm. We compared test characteristics of the optimized algorithm, the Public Health-Seattle and King County STD Clinic's current 13-component algorithm, and a simple 2-component algorithm including only presence of symptoms and contact to STD.
RESULTS: From October 2010 to June 2015, 18,653 unique patients completed a computer-assisted self-interview. In the validation samples, the optimized, current, and simple algorithms appropriately triaged 90%, 85%, and 89% of patients, respectively. The optimized algorithm had lower sensitivity for identifying patients needing standard visits (men, 94%; women, 93%) compared with the current algorithm (men, 95%; women, 98%), as did the simple algorithm (men, 91%; women, 93%). The optimized, current, and simple algorithms triaged 31%, 23%, and 33% of patients to express visits, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: The overall performance of the statistically optimized algorithm did not differ meaningfully from a simple 2-component algorithm. In contrast, the current algorithm had the highest sensitivity but lowest overall performance.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29634599      PMCID: PMC6133713          DOI: 10.1097/OLQ.0000000000000854

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sex Transm Dis        ISSN: 0148-5717            Impact factor:   2.830


  19 in total

1.  Use of computerized medical records to determine the feasibility of testing for chlamydia without patients seeing a practitioner.

Authors:  A Yeung; M Bush; R Cummings; C S Bradshaw; M Chen; H Williams; I Denham; C K Fairley
Journal:  Int J STD AIDS       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 1.359

2.  Effectiveness of a risk-based visitor-prioritizing system at a sexually transmitted infection outpatient clinic.

Authors:  Titia L J Heijman; Akke K Van der Bij; Henry J C De Vries; Edwin J M Van Leent; Harold F J Thiesbrummel; Han S A Fennema
Journal:  Sex Transm Dis       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 2.830

Review 3.  Crack, sex, and STD.

Authors:  R Marx; S O Aral; R T Rolfs; C E Sterk; J G Kahn
Journal:  Sex Transm Dis       Date:  1991 Apr-Jun       Impact factor: 2.830

4.  Characteristics of those who repeatedly acquire sexually transmitted infections: a retrospective cohort study of attendees at three urban sexually transmitted disease clinics in England.

Authors:  G Hughes; A R Brady; M A Catchpole; K A Fenton; P A Rogers; G R Kinghorn; D E Mercey; R N Thin
Journal:  Sex Transm Dis       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 2.830

5.  A tale of two gonorrhea epidemics: results from the STD surveillance network.

Authors:  Lori Marie Newman; Deborah Dowell; Kyle Bernstein; Jennifer Donnelly; Summer Martins; Mark Stenger; Jeffrey Stover; Hillard Weinstock
Journal:  Public Health Rep       Date:  2012 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.792

6.  Chlamydia and gonorrhea diagnosis, treatment, personnel cost savings, and service delivery improvements after the implementation of express sexually transmitted disease testing in Maricopa County, Arizona.

Authors:  Sana Rukh; Renuka Khurana; Tom Mickey; Larissa Anderson; Corinne Velasquez; Melanie Taylor
Journal:  Sex Transm Dis       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 2.830

7.  New Xpress sexually transmissible infection screening clinic improves patient journey and clinic capacity at a large sexual health clinic.

Authors:  Vickie Knight; Nathan Ryder; Rebecca Guy; Heng Lu; Handan Wand; Anna McNulty
Journal:  Sex Transm Dis       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 2.830

8.  "Testing-only" visits: an assessment of missed diagnoses in clients attending sexually transmitted disease clinics.

Authors:  Fujie Xu; Bradley P Stoner; Stephanie N Taylor; Leandro Mena; David H Martin; Suzanne Powell; Lauri E Markowitz
Journal:  Sex Transm Dis       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 2.830

9.  Modernizing operations to improve efficiency and refine the role and mission of sexually transmitted infection clinics.

Authors:  Julia C Dombrowski; Matthew R Golden
Journal:  Sex Transm Dis       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 2.830

10.  Incidence of HIV and sexually transmitted diseases (STD) in a cohort of HIV-negative men who have sex with men (MSM).

Authors:  S R Tabet; M R Krone; M A Paradise; L Corey; W E Stamm; C L Celum
Journal:  AIDS       Date:  1998-10-22       Impact factor: 4.177

View more
  2 in total

1.  Predicting STI Diagnoses Amongst MSM and Young People Attending Sexual Health Clinics in England: Triage Algorithm Development and Validation Using Routine Clinical Data.

Authors:  Carina King; Gwenda Hughes; Martina Furegato; Hamish Mohammed; John Were; Andrew Copas; Richard Gilson; Maryam Shahmanesh; Catherine H Mercer
Journal:  EClinicalMedicine       Date:  2018-11-28

2.  Improving care for sexually transmitted infections.

Authors:  Cornelis A Rietmeijer
Journal:  J Int AIDS Soc       Date:  2019-08       Impact factor: 5.396

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.