Sexually transmitted diseases · 2021
Costs of Identifying Cases of Syphilis Using Rapid Syphilis Tests in Multiple Nonclinical Settings in the United States.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Williams Austin M, Berruti Andrés A
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Outreach screening is a common strategy for detecting cases of syphilis in high-risk populations. New rapid syphilis tests allow for quicker response times and may alter the costs of detecting and treating syphilis in nonclinical settings.
METHODS: Between May and October of 2017, we collected detailed retrospective cost data from 2 outreach screening programs engaging people experiencing homelessness and LGBTQ populations. Comprehensive and retrospective cost information, disaggregated by cost category, programmatic activity, and source of support, was collected during and after the testing period.
RESULTS: Across all sites, rapid syphilis tests were conducted on 595 people at an average cost of $213 per person. Twenty-three cases of syphilis were confirmed and treated for an average cost of $5517 per case, ranging from $3604 at a rehabilitation facility to $13,140 at LGBTQ venues served by a mobile clinic. Personnel contributed the most to total costs (56.4%), followed by supplies (12.8%) and the use of buildings (10.4%). Expenditures by programmatic activity varied substantially across sites.
CONCLUSIONS: Testing costs varied between venues, reflecting differences in the models used and intensity of services provided. Although staff costs are the major driver, buildings and supplies costs are also significant. Our findings suggest that outreach screenings using rapid syphilis tests may be a feasible and cost-effective tool for health departments when targeting known high-prevalence areas and hard-to-reach populations.
METHODS: Between May and October of 2017, we collected detailed retrospective cost data from 2 outreach screening programs engaging people experiencing homelessness and LGBTQ populations. Comprehensive and retrospective cost information, disaggregated by cost category, programmatic activity, and source of support, was collected during and after the testing period.
RESULTS: Across all sites, rapid syphilis tests were conducted on 595 people at an average cost of $213 per person. Twenty-three cases of syphilis were confirmed and treated for an average cost of $5517 per case, ranging from $3604 at a rehabilitation facility to $13,140 at LGBTQ venues served by a mobile clinic. Personnel contributed the most to total costs (56.4%), followed by supplies (12.8%) and the use of buildings (10.4%). Expenditures by programmatic activity varied substantially across sites.
CONCLUSIONS: Testing costs varied between venues, reflecting differences in the models used and intensity of services provided. Although staff costs are the major driver, buildings and supplies costs are also significant. Our findings suggest that outreach screenings using rapid syphilis tests may be a feasible and cost-effective tool for health departments when targeting known high-prevalence areas and hard-to-reach populations.