|
| ||
|
|
||
Chlamydia Screening (chlamydia + screening)
Selected AbstractsEmergency Department Chlamydia Screening Through Partnership with the Public Health DepartmentACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE, Issue 11 2009Charlene Babcock Irvin MD Abstract Background:, The emergency department (ED) serves a population that may benefit from numerous screening initiatives but screening in the ED is challenging due to crowding as well as resource and time constraints. One option may be to collect specimens in the ED and then partner with the public health department (PHD) to analyze the specimens off-site and arrange follow-up treatment. Objectives:, The objective was to explore the feasibility of chlamydia screening in females using a partnership model in which the ED is responsible for urine collection and the PHD is responsible for chlamydia testing, notification, and treatment. Methods:, A collaborative partnership-based chlamydia screening project was initiated at a large (90,000 visits/yr), urban, teaching ED from April 2007 to April 2008. Study information sheets were handed out to a convenience sample of eligible female patients and visitors (15,24 yr of age). Those wishing to participate provided a urine sample and follow-up contact information. The information sheet also asked if they had either lower abdominal pain or vaginal discharge (affirmative answer for either was considered symptomatic). Specimens collected in the ED were retrieved by PHD staff for off-site testing. The PHD contacted those participants testing positive using the patient provided contact information and arranged for treatment. Results:, Of the 633 women offered screening, 296 (47%) agreed to testing and provided samples. Of the 296 tested, 38 (12.8%) were positive for chlamydia infection, and 25 (66%) received follow-up and treatment; 13 could not be contacted through information they provided. A higher percentage of symptomatic subjects (23 of 115, or 20%) tested positive for chlamydia than asymptomatic subjects (15 of 181, or 8.3%; p < 0.01). Conclusions:, This study demonstrates the feasibility of an ED,PHD partnership for chlamydia screening in young women. This model can potentially be applied to other initiatives and may improve public health screening without creating significant additional burdens for crowded EDs. [source] Opportunistic screening for Chlamydia in general practice: the experience of health professionalsHEALTH & SOCIAL CARE IN THE COMMUNITY, Issue 4 2003Elizabeth Perkins Abstract Chlamydia trachomatis is the most common curable bacterial sexually transmitted infection in the UK. The infection is asymptomatic in up to 70% of women, and if untreated, can lead to pelvic inflammatory disease, ectopic pregnancy and infertility. Chlamydial infection can be diagnosed using urine testing and is easily treated with antibiotics. In 1999, the UK Department of Health funded a pilot opportunistic Chlamydia screening programme in two health authorities. All sexually active women between the ages of 16 and 24 years attending general practices and other healthcare settings, such as family planning clinics, antenatal clinics and genito-urinary medicine services, were offered the opportunity to be screened for Chlamydia, regardless of the purpose of their visit. This evaluation was funded to assess the feasibility and acceptability of opportunistic screening. The evaluation was conducted using both qualitative and quantitative methods. The present paper describes findings from the qualitative evaluation study arising from the health professionals' experience of opportunistic screening in general practice. Receptionists were central to the opportunistic screening model in general practice and it was this aspect of the model that raised most concerns. Whilst general practitioners reported that the involvement of receptionists saved them time, the receptionists themselves were sometimes drawn into discussions for which they felt ill equipped and unsuitably located. This research suggests that a call,recall national screening programme would provide a better model to undertake Chlamydia screening in general practice. The advantages of this model are threefold. First, each individual within the target age range can receive information about Chlamydia through the post. Secondly, the test and more detailed information can be managed by a practice nurse in a private and confidential setting. Thirdly, individuals are not repeatedly offered the test when visiting the surgery. [source] Comparing welfare estimates from payment card contingent valuation and discrete choice experimentsHEALTH ECONOMICS, Issue 4 2009Mandy Ryan Abstract This study presents the first comparison of willingness to pay estimates derived from the payment card (PC) contingent valuation and discrete choice experiment (DCE) methods. A within-sample experiment was used to elicit women's preferences for Chlamydia screening. The willingness to pay estimate derived from the DCE was larger than that derived from the PC. To investigate why the willingness to pay estimates were different, a range of validity tests were conducted. Both methods produced theoretically valid results, and there was no difference in the reported difficulty of completing the tasks. Evidence of a prominence effect was found in the PC responses. Responses to the DCE satisfied tests of non-satiation. Responses to both methods were compared with revealed preference data. There were significant differences between stated screening intention in both methods and actual screening uptake. Future work should address the external validity of stated preference methods. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source] A qualitative study of pharmacists' views on offering chlamydia screening to women requesting emergency hormonal contraceptionBJOG : AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS & GYNAECOLOGY, Issue 1 2010G Thomas This was a qualitative study to understand why pharmacists, asked to offer free chlamydia postal screening to Emergency Hormonal Contraception clients, had not offered screening to all eligible women. Twenty-six pharmacists completed exit interviews and 12 agreed to semi-structured in-depth interviews. Although pharmacists were keen to expand their services, they were reluctant to offer chlamydia screening to women who were married or in a long term relationship. To avoid offence they selected women based on age, education and ethnicity. The rationale for chlamydia screening in pharmacy-based EHC schemes is compromised if pharmacists do not offer screening comprehensively. [source] | ||||||||||