Patient-Reported Expedited Partner Therapy for Gonorrhea in the United States: Findings of the STD Surveillance Network 2010-2012
- PMID: 26267871
 - PMCID: PMC6902052
 - DOI: 10.1097/OLQ.0000000000000329
 
Patient-Reported Expedited Partner Therapy for Gonorrhea in the United States: Findings of the STD Surveillance Network 2010-2012
Abstract
Background: Expedited partner therapy (EPT) has been shown to prevent reinfection in persons with gonorrhea and to plausibly reduce incidence. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends EPT as an option for treating sex partners of heterosexual patients. Few studies that examine how the reported use of this valuable intervention differs by patient and provider characteristics and by geography across multiple jurisdictions in the United States are currently available.
Methods: Case and patient interview data were obtained for a random sample of reported cases from 7 geographically disparate US jurisdictions participating in the Sexually Transmitted Disease (STD) Surveillance Network. These data were weighted to be representative of all reported gonorrhea cases in the 7 study sites. Patient receipt of EPT was estimated, and multivariate models were constructed separately to examine factors associated with receipt of EPT for heterosexuals and for men who have sex with men.
Results: Overall, 5.4% of patients diagnosed and reported as having gonorrhea reported receiving EPT to treat their sex partners. Heterosexual patients were more likely to have received EPT than men who have sex with men at 6.6% and 2.6% of patients, respectively. Receipt of EPT did not vary significantly by race, Hispanic ethnicity, or age for either group, although significant variation was observed in different provider settings, with patients from family planning/reproductive health and STD clinic settings more likely to report receiving EPT. Jurisdiction variations were also observed with heterosexual patients in Washington State most likely (35.5%), and those in New York City, Connecticut, and Philadelphia least likely to report receiving EPT (<2%).
Conclusions: With the exception of one jurisdiction in the STD Surveillance Network actively promoting EPT use, patient-reported receipt of the intervention remains suboptimal across the network. Additional efforts to promote EPT, especially for patients diagnosed in private provider and hospital settings, are needed to realize the full potential of this valuable gonorrhea control intervention.
References
- 
    
- Schillinger JA, Kissinger P, Calvet H, et al. Patient-delivered partner treatment with azithromycin to prevent repeated Chlamydia trachomatis infection among women: A randomized, controlled trial. Sex Transm Dis 2003; 30:49–56. - PubMed
 
 - 
    
- Kissinger P, Mohammed H, Richardson-Alston G, et al. Patient-delivered partner treatment for male urethritis: A randomized, controlled trial. Clin Infect Dis 2005; 41:623–629. - PubMed
 
 - 
    
- Golden MR, Whittington WL, Handsfield HH, et al. Effect of expedited treatment of sex partners on recurrent or persistent gonorrhea or chlamydial infection. N Engl J Med 2005; 352:676–685. - PubMed
 
 - 
    
- Golden MR, Kerani RP, Stenger M, et al. Uptake and population-level impact of expedited partner therapy (EPT) on Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae: The Washington State Community-Level Randomized Trial of EPT. PLoS Med 2015; 12:e1001777. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001777. eCollection 2015. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
 
 - 
    
- Hogben M, McCree DH, Golden MR. Patient-delivered partner therapy for sexually transmitted diseases as practiced by U.S. physicians. Sex Transm Dis 2005; 32:101–105. - PubMed
 
 
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Research Materials
