Sexually transmitted diseases · 2006
Patient-delivered partner treatment for Trichomonas vaginalis infection: a randomized controlled trial.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка 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.
Kissinger Patricia, Schmidt Norine, Mohammed Hamish, Leichliter Jami S, Gift Thomas L, Meadors Bernadette, Sanders Cheryl, Farley Thomas A
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: Infections with Trichomonas vaginalis (TV) are common and recurrence rates are high. Better methods of treating partners of women with trichomoniasis are needed.
GOAL: To determine if patient-delivered partner treatment (PDPT) is better and more cost-effective than partner referral.
STUDY DESIGN: Women attending a family planning clinic who were culture-positive and treated for TV (N = 463) were randomized to either standard partner referral (PR), booklet-enhanced partner referral (BEPR), or PDPT. At baseline and 1 month, women were interviewed and cultured for TV. Detailed cost information was also collected.
RESULTS: Most women had 1 partner, were less than 24 years old, and were black. The percentage of women reporting that their partners were treated was similar for PDPT but significantly lower for BEPR compared to PR. TV follow-up rates were similar. PDPT cost less and was cost saving compared to PR and BEPR.
CONCLUSION: Among women with TV, PDPT did not result in more partners taking the medicine or lower follow-up rates than PR but was less costly.
GOAL: To determine if patient-delivered partner treatment (PDPT) is better and more cost-effective than partner referral.
STUDY DESIGN: Women attending a family planning clinic who were culture-positive and treated for TV (N = 463) were randomized to either standard partner referral (PR), booklet-enhanced partner referral (BEPR), or PDPT. At baseline and 1 month, women were interviewed and cultured for TV. Detailed cost information was also collected.
RESULTS: Most women had 1 partner, were less than 24 years old, and were black. The percentage of women reporting that their partners were treated was similar for PDPT but significantly lower for BEPR compared to PR. TV follow-up rates were similar. PDPT cost less and was cost saving compared to PR and BEPR.
CONCLUSION: Among women with TV, PDPT did not result in more partners taking the medicine or lower follow-up rates than PR but was less costly.