Efficiency and cost-effectiveness of field follow-up for patients with Chlamydia trachomatis infection in a sexually transmitted diseases clinic
- PMID: 3358237
- DOI: 10.1097/00007435-198801000-00003
Efficiency and cost-effectiveness of field follow-up for patients with Chlamydia trachomatis infection in a sexually transmitted diseases clinic
Abstract
Unlike contact-tracing procedures for syphilis and gonorrhea, field follow-up to locate and treat patients with Chlamydia trachomatis infections has not been extensively applied in the United States. We implemented two studies to assess the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of using field follow-up for contact of two groups: patients with chlamydial infection detected as part of a screening program and women who were sexual partners of men with nongonococcal urethritis (NGU). Of the 142 patients with chlamydial infection who had not been treated empirically, 112 (79%) returned for treatment when a reminder system was used, as compared with a return rate of 97% (259/266) achieved by field follow-up (P less than 0.0001). Among the 678 men with NGU enrolled in a randomized trial of field follow-up vs. two self-referral methods, field follow-up yielded over three times as many partners returning to the clinic for treatment as did either of the other two methods (P less than 0.001). Analyses using the estimated costs of the intervention strategies and the medical costs associated with an untreated chlamydial infection showed that field follow-up by trained investigators proved to be not only the most efficient method for locating patients with chlamydial infection and/or patients who were at risk for it, but also the most cost-effective in terms of total health-care dollars spent.
Similar articles
-
Health gains from screening for infection of the lower genital tract in women attending for termination of pregnancy.Lancet. 1993 Jul 24;342(8865):206-10. doi: 10.1016/0140-6736(93)92299-9. Lancet. 1993. PMID: 8100930
-
Evaluation of field follow-up in a sexually transmitted disease clinic for patients at risk for infection with Neisseria gonorrhoeae and Chlamydia trachomatis.Sex Transm Dis. 1992 Mar-Apr;19(2):99-104. Sex Transm Dis. 1992. PMID: 1595019
-
Assessing the number of genital chlamydial infections in the United States.J Reprod Med. 1985 Mar;30(3 Suppl):269-72. J Reprod Med. 1985. PMID: 4020783
-
Chlamydia trachomatis: impact on human reproduction.Hum Reprod Update. 1999 Sep-Oct;5(5):433-47. doi: 10.1093/humupd/5.5.433. Hum Reprod Update. 1999. PMID: 10582782 Review.
-
Treatment of sexually transmitted chlamydial infections.JAMA. 1986 Apr 4;255(13):1750-6. JAMA. 1986. PMID: 3512871 Review.
Cited by
-
Screening for Chlamydia trachomatis in adolescent males: a cost-based decision analysis.Am J Public Health. 1990 May;80(5):545-50. doi: 10.2105/ajph.80.5.545. Am J Public Health. 1990. PMID: 2109544 Free PMC article.
-
Drug therapies for sexually transmitted diseases. Clinical and economic considerations.Drugs. 1995 Apr;49(4):496-515. doi: 10.2165/00003495-199549040-00002. Drugs. 1995. PMID: 7789285 Review.
-
Chlamydia trachomatis in adolescents and adults. Clinical and economic implications.Pharmacoeconomics. 1998 Feb;13(2):191-222. doi: 10.2165/00019053-199813020-00004. Pharmacoeconomics. 1998. PMID: 10178647 Review.
-
Effectiveness of patient delivered partner medication for preventing recurrent Chlamydia trachomatis.Sex Transm Infect. 1998 Oct;74(5):331-3. doi: 10.1136/sti.74.5.331. Sex Transm Infect. 1998. PMID: 10195027 Free PMC article.
-
Increasing Chlamydia and Gonorrhea Testing for Adolescents in the Pediatric Emergency Department.Pediatrics. 2024 Jan 1;153(1):e2022059707. doi: 10.1542/peds.2022-059707. Pediatrics. 2024. PMID: 38053440 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical