Inviting an author to review:
Find an author and click ‘Invite to review selected article’ near their name.
Search for authorsSearch for similar articles
52
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Rationale, design, and results of the first screening round of a comprehensive, register-based, Chlamydia screening implementation programme in the Netherlands

      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

          Implementing Chlamydia trachomatis screening in the Netherlands has been a point of debate for several years. The National Health Council advised against implementing nationwide screening until additional data collected from a pilot project in 2003 suggested that screening by risk profiles could be effective. A continuous increase in infections recorded in the national surveillance database affirmed the need for a more active approach. Here, we describe the rationale, design, and implementation of a Chlamydia screening demonstration programme.

          Methods

          A systematic, selective, internet-based Chlamydia screening programme started in April 2008. Letters are sent annually to all 16 to 29-year-old residents of Amsterdam, Rotterdam, and selected municipalities of South Limburg. The letters invite sexually active persons to login to http://www.chlamydiatest.nl with a personal code and to request a test kit. In the lower prevalence area of South Limburg, test kits can only be requested if the internet-based risk assessment exceeds a predefined value.

          Results

          We sent invitations to 261,025 people in the first round. One-fifth of the invitees requested a test kit, of whom 80% sent in a sample for testing. The overall positivity rate was 4.2%.

          Conclusions

          This programme advances Chlamydia control activities in the Netherlands. Insight into the feasibility, effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and impact of this large-scale screening programme will determine whether the programme will be implemented nationally.

          Related collections

          Most cited references17

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Clinical practice. Genital chlamydial infections.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Prevention of pelvic inflammatory disease by screening for cervical chlamydial infection.

            Chlamydia trachomatis is a frequent cause of pelvic inflammatory disease. However, there is little information from clinical studies about whether screening women for cervical chlamydial infection can reduce the incidence of this serious illness. We conducted a randomized, controlled trial to determine whether selective testing for cervical chlamydial infection prevented pelvic inflammatory disease. Women who were at high risk for disease were identified by means of a questionnaire mailed to all women enrollees in a health maintenance organization who were 18 to 34 years of age. Eligible respondents were randomly assigned to undergo testing for C. trachomatis or to receive usual care; both groups were followed for one year. Possible cases of pelvic inflammatory disease were identified through a variety of data bases and were confirmed by review of the women's medical records. We used an intention-to-screen analysis to compare the incidence of pelvic inflammatory disease in the two groups of women. Of the 2607 eligible women, 1009 were randomly assigned to screening and 1598 to usual care. A total of 645 women in the screening group (64 percent) for chlamydia; 7 percent tested positive and were treated. At the end of the follow-up period, there had been 9 verified cases of pelvic inflammatory disease among the women in the screening group and 33 cases among the women receiving usual care (relative risk, 0.44; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.20 to 0.90). We found similar results when we used logistic-regression analysis to control for potentially confounding variables. A strategy of identifying, testing, and treating women at increased risk for cervical chlamydial infection was associated with a reduced incidence of pelvic inflammatory disease.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Randomised controlled trial of screening for Chlamydia trachomatis to prevent pelvic inflammatory disease: the POPI (prevention of pelvic infection) trial

              Objective To determine whether screening and treating women for chlamydial infection reduces the incidence of pelvic inflammatory disease over the subsequent 12 months. Design Randomised controlled trial. Setting Common rooms, lecture theatres, and student bars at universities and further education colleges in London. Participants 2529 sexually active female students, mean age 21 years (range 16-27). Intervention Participants completed a questionnaire and provided self taken vaginal swabs, with follow-up after one year. Samples were randomly allocated to immediate testing and treatment for chlamydial infection, or storage and analysis after a year (deferred screening controls). Main outcome measure Incidence of clinical pelvic inflammatory disease over 12 months. Results Baseline prevalence of chlamydia was 5.4% (68/1254) in screened women and 5.9% (75/1265) in controls. 94% (2377/2529) of women were followed up after 12 months. The incidence of pelvic inflammatory disease was 1.3% (15/1191) in screened women compared with 1.9% (23/1186) in controls (relative risk 0.65, 95% confidence interval 0.34 to 1.22). Seven of 74 control women (9.5%, 95% confidence interval 4.7% to 18.3%) who tested positive for chlamydial infection at baseline developed pelvic inflammatory disease over 12 months compared with one of 63 (1.6%) screened women (relative risk 0.17, 0.03 to 1.01). However, most episodes of pelvic inflammatory disease occurred in women who tested negative for chlamydia at baseline (79%, 30/38). 22% (527/2377) of women reported being tested independently for chlamydia during the trial. Conclusion Although some evidence suggests that screening for chlamydia reduces rates of pelvic inflammatory disease, especially in women with chlamydial infection at baseline, the effectiveness of a single chlamydia test in preventing pelvic inflammatory disease over 12 months may have been overestimated. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00115388.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMC Infect Dis
                BMC Infectious Diseases
                BioMed Central
                1471-2334
                2010
                7 October 2010
                : 10
                : 293
                Affiliations
                [1 ]STI AIDS Netherlands, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
                [2 ]Amsterdam Public Health Service, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
                [3 ]Rotterdam Rijnmond Public Health Service, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
                [4 ]Department of Infectious Diseases, South Limburg Public Health Service, Geleen, The Netherlands
                [5 ]Centre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute of Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, The Netherlands
                Article
                1471-2334-10-293
                10.1186/1471-2334-10-293
                2959064
                20925966
                588f0005-9671-4caa-bbd3-3a1f673dda77
                Copyright ©2010 van Bergen 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
                : 30 May 2010
                : 7 October 2010
                Categories
                Research Article

                Infectious disease & Microbiology
                Infectious disease & Microbiology

                Comments

                Comment on this article