Sexually transmitted diseases · 2007
Evaluation of a population-based program of expedited partner therapy for gonorrhea and chlamydial infection.
Оценочное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаПоддержка службы здравоохранения СШАНазвание 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.
Golden Matthew R, Hughes James P, Brewer Devon D, Holmes King K, Whittington William L H, Hogben Matthew, Malinski Cheryl, Golding Anne, Handsfield H Hunter
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a partner notification program for gonorrhea and chlamydial infection that involves communitywide access to free patient-delivered partner therapy (PDPT) and use of case-report forms to triage patients to receive partner notification assistance.
METHODS: We evaluated program components in randomly selected cases and compared outcomes before and after program institution.
RESULTS: Following institution of the program, the percentage of cases who received PDPT from their diagnosing clinician increased from 5.6% to 16% (adjusted OR 3.2, 2.5-4.1). Among randomly selected cases, those referred to the health department via the case-report form were significantly more likely than nonreferred cases to have untreated sex partners (76% vs. 35%, OR 6.0, 95% CI 4.5-8.0), to accept PDPT from the health department (36% vs. 14%, 3.3, 95% CI 2.4-4.7), and to request that health department staff notify a partner for them (11% vs. 3%, OR 3.5, 95% CI 1.8-6.7). The percentage of cases classified as having all of their partners treated increased from 39% to 65% concurrent with institution of the program.
CONCLUSIONS: A public health program that promotes routine use of PDPT and referral of selected patients for partner notification assistance appears to have improved partner notification outcomes.
METHODS: We evaluated program components in randomly selected cases and compared outcomes before and after program institution.
RESULTS: Following institution of the program, the percentage of cases who received PDPT from their diagnosing clinician increased from 5.6% to 16% (adjusted OR 3.2, 2.5-4.1). Among randomly selected cases, those referred to the health department via the case-report form were significantly more likely than nonreferred cases to have untreated sex partners (76% vs. 35%, OR 6.0, 95% CI 4.5-8.0), to accept PDPT from the health department (36% vs. 14%, 3.3, 95% CI 2.4-4.7), and to request that health department staff notify a partner for them (11% vs. 3%, OR 3.5, 95% CI 1.8-6.7). The percentage of cases classified as having all of their partners treated increased from 39% to 65% concurrent with institution of the program.
CONCLUSIONS: A public health program that promotes routine use of PDPT and referral of selected patients for partner notification assistance appears to have improved partner notification outcomes.