A Systematic Review of New Approaches to Sexually Transmitted Infection Screening Framed in the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation, and Behavior Model of Implementation Science.

Abstract: Chlamydia and gonorrhea are 2 of the most common bacterial sexually transmitted infections (STIs) worldwide. Rising chlamydia and gonorrhea rates along with increased closing of STI clinics has led many to seek STI testing in clinical settings such as urgent cares and walk-in clinics. However, with competing priorities, providing effective and efficient STI care can be difficult in these settings. This has left a growing need for the implementation of novel STI screening programs in other clinical settings. This review summarizes previous studies that have evaluated the clinical implementation of chlamydia and gonorrhea screening programs in these settings. Literature from January 2015 to February 2020 regarding the implementation or evaluation of STI screening programs in clinical settings was reviewed. Constructs from the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation, and Behavior model were used to organize results, as this model can aid in identifying specific strategies for behavior/process change interventions. We found that multiple STI screening programs have been implemented and evaluated in 5 different countries and multiple health care facilities including sexual health clinics, urgent cares, walk-in clinics, and university health clinics. When implementing new STI screening programs, sample-first, test-and-go services and molecular point-of-care (POC) testing approaches were found to be effective in increasing screening and reducing costs and time to treatment. At the health care systems level, these programs can help reduce STI screening costs and generate additional revenue for clinics. At the provider level, clear communication and guidance can help clinical and administrative staff in adopting new screening programs. Finally, at the patient level, new programs can reduce time to treatment and travel costs in visiting clinics multiple times for testing and treatment services.
Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest and Sources of Funding: Dr Van Der Pol receives research support to her institution from the following: Abbott Molecular, BD Diagnostics, BioFire Diagnostics, Hologic, Rheonix, Roche Diagnostics, and SpeeDx. For remaining authors, no potential conflicts were declared. The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, or publication of this article.
(Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American Sexually Transmitted Diseases Association.)