52
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Internet testing for Chlamydia trachomatis in England, 2006 to 2010

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          In recent years there has been interest in websites as a means of increasing access to free chlamydia tests through the National Chlamydia Screening Programme (NCSP) in England. We aimed to describe and evaluate online access to chlamydia testing within the NCSP.

          Methods

          We analysed NCSP chlamydia testing data (2006–2010) for 15–24 year olds from the 71/95 programme areas in England where site codes were available to identify tests ordered through the internet. The characteristics of people using online testing services in 2010 were compared with those testing in general practice (GP) or community sexual and reproductive health (SRH) services. We evaluated 58 websites offering free chlamydia tests through the NCSP, and 32 offering kits on a commercial basis for signposting to clinical service and health promotion advice offered.

          Results

          Between 2006 and 2010, 5% of all tests in the included programme areas were accessed through the internet. The number of internet tests increased from 18 (<1% of all tests) in 2006 to 59,750 in 2010 (6% of all NCSP tests). In 2010 the proportion of NCSP tests accessed online by programme area ranged from <1% to 38%. The proportion of tests with a positive result on the internet was higher than tests from general practice and comparable to those from community SRH services (internet 7.6%; GP 5.6%; Community SRH 8.2%). A higher proportion of people accessing online testing were male, aged 20–24 and reported >1 sexual partner in the past year. Provision of sexual health information and appropriate signposting for those in need of clinical services varied between websites. Service provision within the NCSP was fragmented with multiple providers serving specific geographical catchment areas.

          Conclusion

          Internet testing reaches a population with a relatively high risk of chlamydia infection and appears acceptable to young men, a group that has been difficult to engage with chlamydia testing. In order to maximise the potential benefit of these services, websites should be consistent with national guidelines and adhere to minimum standards for signposting to clinical care and health promotion information. The current system with multiple providers servicing geographically specific catchment areas is contrary to the geographically unrestricted nature of the internet and potentially confusing for clients.

          Related collections

          Most cited references7

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Effectiveness of yearly, register based screening for chlamydia in the Netherlands: controlled trial with randomised stepped wedge implementation

          Objective To evaluate the effectiveness of register based, yearly chlamydia screening. Design Controlled trial with randomised stepped wedge implementation in three blocks. Setting Three regions of the Netherlands: Amsterdam, Rotterdam, and South Limburg. Participants 317 304 women and men aged 16-29 years listed on municipal registers at start of trial. Intervention From March 2008 to February 2011, the Chlamydia Screening Implementation programme offered yearly chlamydia screening tests. Postal invitations asked people to use an internet site to request a kit for self collection of samples, which would then be sent to regional laboratories for testing. Treatment and partner notification were done by the general practitioner or at a sexually transmitted infection clinic. Main outcome measures Primary outcomes were the percentage of chlamydia tests positive (positivity), percentage of invitees returning a specimen (uptake), and estimated chlamydia prevalence. Secondary outcomes were positivity according to sex, age, region, and sociodemographic factors; adherence to screening invitations; and incidence of self reported pelvic inflammatory disease. Results The participation rate was 16.1% (43 358/269 273) after the first invitation, 10.8% after the second, and 9.5% after the third, compared with 13.0% (6223/48 031) in the control block invited at the end of round two of the intervention. Chlamydia positivity in the intervention blocks at the first invitation was the same as in the control block (4.3%) and 0.2% lower at the third invitation (odds ratio 0.96 (95% confidence interval 0.83 to 1.10)). No substantial decreases in positivity were seen after three screening rounds in any region or sociodemographic group. Among the people who participated three times (2.8% of all invitees), positivity fell from 5.9% to 2.9% (odds ratio 0.49 (0.47 to 0.50)). Conclusions There was no statistical evidence of an impact on chlamydia positivity rates or estimated population prevalence from the Chlamydia Screening Implementation programme after three years at the participation levels obtained. The current evidence does not support a national roll out of this register based chlamydia screening programme. Trial registration NTR 3071 (Netherlands Trial Register, www.trialregister.nl).
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Acceptability of the internet-based Chlamydia screening implementation in the Netherlands and insights into nonresponse.

            The study assessed the acceptability of internet-based Chlamydia screening using home-testing kits among 16- to 29-year-old participants and nonparticipants in the first year of a Chlamydia Screening Implementation program in the Netherlands. Questionnaire surveys were administered to randomly selected participants (acceptability survey) and nonparticipants (nonresponse survey) in 3 regions of the Netherlands where screening was offered. Participants received email invitations to an online survey; nonparticipants received postal questionnaires. Both surveys enquired into opinions on the screening design, reasons for (non-) participation and future willingness to be tested. The response rate was 63% (3499/5569) in the acceptability survey and 15% (2053/13,724) in the nonresponse survey. Primary motivation for participating in the screening was "for my health" (63%). The main reason for nonresponse given by sexually active nonparticipants was "no perceived risk of infection" (40%). Only 2% reported nonparticipation due to no internet access. Participants found the internet (93%) and home-testing (97%) advantages of the program, regardless of test results. Two-thirds of participants would test again, 92% via the screening program. Half of nonparticipants were appreciative of the program design, while about 1 in 5 did not like internet usage, home-testing, or posting samples. The screening method was highly acceptable to participants. Nonparticipants in this survey were generally appreciative of the program design. Both groups made informed choices about participation and surveyed low-risk nonparticipants accurately perceived their low-risk status. Although many nonparticipants were not reached by the nonresponse survey, current insights on acceptability and nonresponse are undoubtedly valuable for evaluation of the current program.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Simplifying chlamydia testing: an innovative Chlamydia trachomatis testing approach using the internet and a home sampling strategy: population based study.

              To measure the coverage, gender distribution, and participants' prevalence of genital Chlamydia trachomatis infections using a new internet based self selective testing approach by means of home sampling in the general population in Sweden. To investigate factors associated with these measures. Observational survey of people actively ordering coded testing packages, and checking their test results, from a known website. No personal invitations were sent out. All inhabitants (256 885 men and women) in a Swedish county were eligible to participate. A special interest was taken in coverage, gender distribution, participants' chlamydia prevalence, and determinants for infection. Testing was highest in the age group 20-24 years, where 298/9495 (3.1%) of all women and 171/9574 (1.8%) of all men in the population participated. The overall population participation (all ages) was 906/256 885 (0.4%). 40% (364/906) of the tests were from men and 60% (542/906) from women. The prevalence of Chlamydia trachomatis infection was 6.0% (95% CI: 3.6% to 8.4%) among male participants and 4.6% (95% CI: 2.8% to 6.4%) among female participants. Prevalence increased with decreasing age. Believing to be infected and having symptoms were the strongest determinants of infection. Simplifying and increasing the accessibility of chlamydia testing by means of internet and home sampling proved feasible. Self risk assessment improves the chance of finding people infected by Chlamydia trachomatis, especially among men, if an accessible testing method is offered. This new method can serve as a supplement to regular preventive methods and might encourage young people to be tested.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMC Public Health
                BMC Public Health
                BMC Public Health
                BioMed Central
                1471-2458
                2012
                19 December 2012
                : 12
                : 1095
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Health Protection Agency, London, UK
                [2 ]Department of Sexual Health and HIV, Kings College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
                [3 ]Sarah Woodhall, Health Protection Agency, HIV & STI Department, 61 Colindale Avenue, London, NW9 5EQ, UK
                Article
                1471-2458-12-1095
                10.1186/1471-2458-12-1095
                3554557
                23253518
                0f21e9c3-4c94-4505-b57e-d9e614d84eb1
                Copyright ©2012 Woodhall et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 20 July 2012
                : 10 December 2012
                Categories
                Research Article

                Public health
                chlamydia trachomatis,screening,internet
                Public health
                chlamydia trachomatis, screening, internet

                Comments

                Comment on this article