Search

Background: Most economic evaluations of interventions to prevent or control curable sexually transmitted infections (STIs), such as chlamydia, have focused on the longer-term health impacts avoided. However, there is a range of qualitative evidence suggesting that those who think that they might have an STI and/or undergo testing can experience impacts on their quality of life (QoL) at the testing and diagnosis stage. A systematic review was undertaken to identify and evaluate studies that have measured QoL and sexual health for women undergoing testing and screening for chlamydia., Methods: A systematic review was conducted, with searches of 5 electronic databases up to the end of August 2013. Data on study characteristics, methods, and results were extracted using a standard template, and a narrative synthesis was undertaken., Results: Eight studies measuring QoL and sexual health were included. The included studies measured a variety of aspects of QoL and sexual health, with a focus on psychosocial well-being. A range of validated tools were used to measure health and QoL, and "bespoke" questions were also developed. Few significant differences were found with comparator groups using generic instruments, but some impacts were found using bespoke questions., Conclusions: Although researchers have begun to examine the relationships between QoL and sexual health, there are limitations associated with the evidence available. There is, thus, a need for further research exploring sexual health and QoL for patients undergoing testing and screening for curable STIs, with a focus on analyzing the most appropriate methodological approaches in this context.

Background: Accelerated partner therapy (APT) is a promising partner notification (PN) intervention in specialist sexual health clinic attenders. To address its applicability in primary care, we undertook a pilot randomised controlled trial (RCT) of two APT models in community settings., Methods: Three-arm pilot RCT of two adjunct APT interventions: APTHotline (telephone assessment of partner(s) plus standard PN) and APTPharmacy (community pharmacist assessment of partner(s) plus routine PN), versus standard PN alone (patient referral). Index patients were women diagnosed with genital chlamydia in 12 general practices and three community contraception and sexual health (CASH) services in London and south coast of England, randomised between 1 September 2011 and 31 July 2013., Results: 199 women described 339 male partners, of whom 313 were reported by the index as contactable. The proportions of contactable partners considered treated within 6 weeks of index diagnosis were APTHotline 39/111 (35%), APTPharmacy 46/100 (46%), standard patient referral 46/102 (45%). Among treated partners, 8/39 (21%) in APTHotline arm were treated via hotline and 14/46 (30%) in APTPharmacy arm were treated via pharmacy., Conclusions: The two novel primary care APT models were acceptable, feasible, compliant with regulations and capable of achieving acceptable outcomes within a pilot RCT but intervention uptake was low. Although addition of these interventions to standard PN did not result in a difference between arms, overall PN uptake was higher than previously reported in similar settings, probably as a result of introducing a formal evaluation. Recruitment to an individually randomised trial proved challenging and full evaluation will likely require service-level randomisation., Trial Registration Number: Registered UK Clinical Research Network Study Portfolio id number 10123., (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/)

Many public health interventions have aims which are broader than health alone; this means that there are difficulties in using outcome measures that capture health effects only, such as Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs). Sexually Transmitted Infections (STIs) are a major public health concern both in the UK and globally, with Chlamydia trachomatis being the most common bacterial STI worldwide. There is scope for the wider use of qualitative syntheses in health-related research; in this study we highlight their potential value in informing outcome identification, particularly for public health interventions where a broad range of outcomes may need to be considered. This article presents a systematic review and meta-ethnography of qualitative studies that investigated women's experiences of thinking about and participating in testing for chlamydia. The meta-ethnography highlights issues relating to beliefs about STIs and testing, assessing risk and interpreting symptoms, emotional responses to testing, coping with diagnosis, relationship with sex partners(s), informal support, and interaction with health care services. The study findings suggest that women can experience a range of impacts on their health and quality of life. It is important that this range of effects is taken into account within evaluations, to ensure that decision makers are fully informed about the outcomes associated with screening interventions, and ultimately, to make sure that appropriate interventions are available to support women in maintaining good sexual health., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Economic evaluations of interventions to prevent and control sexually transmitted infections such as Chlamydia trachomatis are increasingly required to present their outcomes in terms of quality-adjusted life-years using preference-based measurements of relevant health states. The objectives of this study were to critically evaluate how published cost-effectiveness studies have conceptualized and valued health states associated with chlamydia and to examine the primary evidence available to inform health state utility values (HSUVs)., Methods: A systematic review was conducted, with searches of six electronic databases up to December 2012. Data on study characteristics, methods, and main results were extracted by using a standard template., Results: Nineteen economic evaluations of relevant interventions were included. Individual studies considered different health states and assigned different values and durations. Eleven studies cited the same source for HSUVs. Only five primary studies valued relevant health states. The methods and viewpoints adopted varied, and different values for health states were generated., Conclusions: Limitations in the information available about HSUVs associated with chlamydia and its complications have implications for the robustness of economic evaluations in this area. None of the primary studies could be used without reservation to inform cost-effectiveness analyses in the United Kingdom. Future debate should consider appropriate methods for valuing health states for infectious diseases, because recommended approaches may not be suitable. Unless we adequately tackle the challenges associated with measuring and valuing health-related quality of life for patients with chlamydia and other infectious diseases, evaluating the cost-effectiveness of interventions in this area will remain problematic., (© 2013 International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) Published by International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) All rights reserved.)

Objective: To investigate the cost effectiveness of screening for Chlamydia trachomatis compared with a policy of no organised screening in the United Kingdom., Design: Economic evaluation using a transmission dynamic mathematical model., Setting: Central and southwest England., Participants: Hypothetical population of 50,000 men and women, in which all those aged 16-24 years were invited to be screened each year., Main Outcome Measures: Cost effectiveness based on major outcomes averted, defined as pelvic inflammatory disease, ectopic pregnancy, infertility, or neonatal complications., Results: The incremental cost per major outcome averted for a programme of screening women only (assuming eight years of screening) was 22,300 pounds (33,000 euros; $45,000) compared with no organised screening. For a programme screening both men and women, the incremental cost effectiveness ratio was approximately 28,900 pounds. Pelvic inflammatory disease leading to hospital admission was the most frequently averted major outcome. The model was highly sensitive to the incidence of major outcomes and to uptake of screening. When both were increased the cost effectiveness ratio fell to 6200 pound per major outcome averted for screening women only., Conclusions: Proactive register based screening for chlamydia is not cost effective if the uptake of screening and incidence of complications are based on contemporary empirical studies, which show lower rates than commonly assumed. These data are relevant to discussions about the cost effectiveness of the opportunistic model of chlamydia screening being introduced in England.

Objectives: To investigate epidemiological, social, diagnostic and economic aspects of chlamydia screening in non-genitourinary medicine settings., Methods: Linked studies around a cross-sectional population-based survey of adult men and women invited to collect urine and (for women) vulvovaginal swab specimens at home and mail these to a laboratory for testing for Chlamydia trachomatis. Specimens were used in laboratory evaluations of an amplified enzyme immunoassay (PCE EIA) and two nucleic acid amplification tests [Cobas polymerase chain reaction (PCR), Becton Dickinson strand displacement amplification (SDA)]. Chlamydia-positive cases and two negative controls completed a risk factor questionnaire. Chlamydia-positive cases were invited into a randomised controlled trial of partner notification strategies. Samples of individuals testing negative completed psychological questionnaires before and after screening. In-depth interviews were conducted at all stages of screening. Chlamydia transmission and cost-effectiveness of screening were investigated in a transmission dynamic model., Setting and Participants: General population in the Bristol and Birmingham areas of England. In total, 19,773 women and men aged 16-39 years were randomly selected from 27 general practice lists., Results: Screening invitations reached 73% (14,382/19,773). Uptake (4731 participants), weighted for sampling, was 39.5% (95% CI 37.7, 40.8%) in women and 29.5% (95% CI 28.0, 31.0%) in men aged 16-39 years. Chlamydia prevalence (219 positive results) in 16-24 year olds was 6.2% (95% CI 4.9, 7.8%) in women and 5.3% (95% CI 4.4, 6.3%) in men. The case-control study did not identify any additional factors that would help target screening. Screening did not adversely affect anxiety, depression or self-esteem. Participants welcomed the convenience and privacy of home-sampling. The relative sensitivity of PCR on male urine specimens was 100% (95% CI 89.1, 100%). The combined relative sensitivities of PCR and SDA using female urine and vulvovaginal swabs were 91.8% (86.1, 95.7, 134/146) and 97.3% (93.1, 99.2%, 142/146). A total of 140 people (74% of eligible) participated in the randomised trial. Compared with referral to a genitourinary medicine clinic, partner notification by practice nurses resulted in 12.4% (95% CI -3.7, 28.6%) more patients with at least one partner treated and 22.0% (95% CI 6.1, 37.8%) more patients with all partners treated. The health service and patients costs (2005 prices) of home-based postal chlamydia screening were 21.47 pounds (95% CI 19.91 pounds, 25.99) per screening invitation and 28.56 pounds (95% CI 22.10 pounds, 30.43) per accepted offer. Preliminary modelling found an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (2003 prices) comparing screening men and women annually to no screening in the base case of 27,000 pounds/major outcome averted at 8 years. If estimated screening uptake and pelvic inflammatory disease incidence were increased, the cost-effectiveness ratio fell to 3700 pounds/major outcome averted., Conclusions: Proactive screening for chlamydia in women and men using home-collected specimens was feasible and acceptable. Chlamydia prevalence rates in men and women in the general population are similar. Nucleic acid amplification tests can be used on first-catch urine specimens and vulvovaginal swabs. The administrative costs of proactive screening were similar to those for opportunistic screening. Using empirical estimates of screening uptake and incidence of complications, screening was not cost-effective.

Objective: To review systematically and critically, evidence used to derive estimates of costs and cost effectiveness of chlamydia screening., Methods: Systematic review. A search of 11 electronic bibliographic databases from the earliest date available to August 2004 using keywords including chlamydia, pelvic inflammatory disease, economic evaluation, and cost. We included studies of chlamydia screening in males and/or females over 14 years, including studies of diagnostic tests, contact tracing, and treatment as part of a screening programme. Outcomes included cases of chlamydia identified and major outcomes averted. We assessed methodological quality and the modelling approach used., Results: Of 713 identified papers we included 57 formal economic evaluations and two cost studies. Most studies found chlamydia screening to be cost effective, partner notification to be an effective adjunct, and testing with nucleic acid amplification tests, and treatment with azithromycin to be cost effective. Methodological problems limited the validity of these findings: most studies used static models that are inappropriate for infectious diseases; restricted outcomes were used as a basis for policy recommendations; and high estimates of the probability of chlamydia associated complications might have overestimated cost effectiveness. Two high quality dynamic modelling studies found opportunistic screening to be cost effective but poor reporting or uncertainty about complication rates make interpretation difficult., Conclusion: The inappropriate use of static models to study interventions to prevent a communicable disease means that uncertainty remains about whether chlamydia screening programmes are cost effective or not. The results of this review can be used by health service managers in the allocation of resources, and health economists and other researchers who are considering further research in this area.

Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of a practice nurse led strategy to improve the notification and treatment of partners of people with chlamydia infection., Design: Randomised controlled trial., Setting: 27 general practices in the Bristol and Birmingham areas., Participants: 140 men and women with chlamydia (index cases) diagnosed by screening of a home collected urine sample or vulval swab specimen., Interventions: Partner notification at the general practice immediately after diagnosis by trained practice nurses, with telephone follow up by a health adviser; or referral to a specialist health adviser at a genitourinary medicine clinic., Main Outcome Measures: Primary outcome was the proportion of index cases with at least one treated sexual partner. Specified secondary outcomes included the number of sexual contacts elicited during a sexual history, positive test result for chlamydia six weeks after treatment, and the cost of each strategy in 2003 sterling prices., Results: 65.3% (47/72) of participants receiving practice nurse led partner notification had at least one partner treated compared with 52.9% (39/68) of those referred to a genitourinary medicine clinic (risk difference 12.4%, 95% confidence interval -1.8% to 26.5%). Of 68 participants referred to the clinic, 21 (31%) did not attend. The costs per index case were 32.55 pounds sterling for the practice nurse led strategy and 32.62 pounds sterling for the specialist referral strategy., Conclusion: Practice based partner notification by trained nurses with telephone follow up by health advisers is at least as effective as referral to a specialist health adviser at a genitourinary medicine clinic, and costs the same. Trial registration Clinical trials: NCT00112255.

Background: Screening has been recommended to reduce the prevalence and morbidity associated with genital chlamydia infection in the United Kingdom., Methods: We describe the rationale and study design of the Chlamydia Screening Studies (ClaSS), a collaborative project designed to evaluate screening outside genitourinary medicine clinics. A non-selective, active screening approach in 16-39 year olds randomly sampled from 27 general practice lists in the Bristol and Birmingham areas formed the basis of interlinked studies: a case-control study was used to investigate factors to improve the targeting of screening; participants with chlamydia were invited to enroll in a randomised controlled trial to evaluate partner notification conducted in primary care; and laboratory based studies were used to assess the best specimens and tests. We also explored psychosocial effects of screening and partner notification and modelled the cost effectiveness of the programme., Conclusion: Results from four pilot practices show that mailing of specimens for chlamydia testing is feasible but that it is difficult to achieve high response rates with postal screening. The high prevalence of asymptomatic infection in men suggests that efforts to screen men for chlamydia should be strengthened.