Top

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2015 | Research article

The acceptability and cost of a home-based chlamydia retesting strategy: findings from the REACT randomised controlled trial

Authors: K. S. Smith, J. M. Kaldor, J. S. Hocking, M. S. Jamil, A. M. McNulty, P. Read, C. S. Bradshaw, M. Y. Chen, C. K. Fairley, H. Wand, K. Worthington, S. Blake, V. Knight, W. Rawlinson, M. Saville, S. N. Tabrizi, S. M. Garland, B. Donovan, R. Guy

Published in: BMC Public Health | Issue 1/2016

Abstract

Background

Chlamydia retesting three months after treatment is recommended to detect reinfections, but retesting rates are typically low. The REACT (retest after Chlamydia trachomatis) randomised trial demonstrated that home-based retesting using postal home-collection kits and SMS reminders, resulted in substantial improvements in retesting rates in women, heterosexual men and men who have sex with men (MSM), with detection of more repeat positive tests compared with SMS reminder alone. In the context of this trial, the acceptability of the home-based strategy was evaluated and the costs of the two strategies were compared.

Methods

REACT participants (200 women, 200 heterosexual men, 200 MSM) were asked to complete an online survey that included home-testing acceptability and preferred methods of retesting. The demographics, sexual behaviour and acceptability of home collection were compared between those preferring home-testing versus clinic-based retesting or no preference, using a chi-square test. The costs to the health system of the clinic-based and home retesting strategies and the cost per infection for each were also compared.

Results

Overall 445/600 (74 %) participants completed the survey; 236/445 from the home-testing arm, and 141 of these (60 %) retested at home. The majority of home arm retesters were comfortable having the kit posted to their home (86 %); found it easy to follow the instructions and collect the specimens (96 %); were confident they had collected the specimens correctly (90 %); and reported no problems (70 %). Most (65 %) preferred home retesting, 21 % had no preference and 14 % preferred clinic retesting. Comparing those with a preference for home testing to those who didn’t, there were significant differences in being comfortable having a kit sent to their home (p = 0.045); not having been diagnosed with chlamydia previously (p = 0.030); and living with friends (p = 0.034). The overall cost for the home retest pathway was $154 (AUD), compared to $169 for the clinic-based retesting pathway and the cost per repeat infection detected was $1409 vs $3133.

Conclusions

Among individuals initially diagnosed with chlamydia in a sexual health clinic setting, home-based retesting was shown to be highly acceptable, preferred by most participants, and cost-efficient. However some clients preferred clinic-based testing, often due to confidentiality concerns in their home environment. Both options should be provided to maximise retesting rates.

Trial registration

The trial was registered with the Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry on September 9, 2011: ACTRN12611000968976.

Available only for authorised users

Kirby Institute. HIV, viral hepatitis and sexually transmitted infections in Australia Annual Surveillance Report 2014. Sydney: Kirby Institute, UNSW Australia; 2014.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Sexually transmitted disease surveillance 2011. Atlanta: United States Department of Health and Human Services; 2012.

European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. Sexually transmitted infections in Europe 2011. Stockholm: ECDC; 2013.

Scott LaMontagne D, Baster K, Emmett L, Nichols T, Randall S, McLean L, et al. Incidence and reinfection rates of genital chlamydial infection among women aged 16–24 years attending general practice, family planning and genitourinary medicine clinics in England: a prospective cohort study by the Chlamydia Recall Study Advisory Group. Sex Transm Infect. 2007;83(4):292–303.CrossRefPubMed

Walker J, Tabrizi SN, Fairley CK, Chen MY, Bradshaw CS, Twin J, et al. Chlamydia trachomatis incidence and re-infection among young women--behavioural and microbiological characteristics. PLoS One. 2012;7(5):e37778.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Harte D, Mercey D, Jarman J, Benn P. Is the recall of men who have sex with men (MSM) diagnosed as having bacterial sexually transmitted infections (STIs) for re-screening a feasible and effective strategy? Sex Transm Infect. 2011;87(7):577–82.CrossRefPubMed

Haggerty CL, Gottlieb SL, Taylor BD, Low N, Xu F, Ness RB. Risk of sequelae after Chlamydia trachomatis genital infection in women. J Infect Dis. 2010;201(Supplement 2):S134–55.CrossRefPubMed

Bernstein KT, Marcus JL, Nieri G, Philip SS, Klausner JD. Rectal gonorrhoea and chlamydia reinfection is associated with increased risk of HIV seroconversion. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2010;53(4):537–43.CrossRefPubMed

Chlamydia trachomatis UK testing guidelines. [http://www.bashh.org/BASHH/Guidelines/Guidelines/BASHH/Guidelines/Guidelines.aspx].

10.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Sexually transmitted diseases treatment guidelines 2010. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2010;59:46.

11.

Australasian Chapter of Sexual Health Medicine. National management guidelines for sexually transmissible infections. Melbourne: Royal Australasian College of Physicians; 2008.

12.

Lanjouw E, Ossewaarde JM, Stary A, Boag F, van der Meijden WI. 2010 European guideline for the management of Chlamydia trachomatis infections. Int J STD AIDS. 2010;21(11):729–37.CrossRefPubMed

13.

Templeton DJ, Read P, Varma R, Bourne C. Australian sexually transmissible infection and HIV testing guidelines for asymptomatic men who have sex with men 2014: a review of the evidence. Sex Health. 2014;11(3):217–29. doi:10.1071/SH14003.CrossRefPubMed

14.

Hoover KW, Tao G, Nye MB, Body BA. Suboptimal adherence to repeat testing recommendations for men and women with positive Chlamydia tests in the United States, 2008-2010. Clin Infect Dis. 2013;56(1):51–7.CrossRefPubMed

15.

Guy R, Wand H, Franklin N, Fairley CK, Chen MY, O’Connor CC, et al. Re-testing for Chlamydia at sexual health services in Australia, 2004-08. Sex Health. 2011;8(2):242–7.CrossRefPubMed

16.

Woodhall SC, Atkins JL, Soldan K, Hughes G, Bone A, Gill ON. Repeat genital Chlamydia trachomatis testing rates in young adults in England, 2010. Sex Transm Infect. 2013;89(1):51–6.CrossRefPubMed

17.

Xu F, Stoner BP, Taylor SN, Mena L, Tian LH, Papp J, et al. Use of home-obtained vaginal swabs to facilitate rescreening for Chlamydia trachomatis infections: two randomized controlled trials. Obstet Gynecol. 2011;118(2 Pt 1):231–9.CrossRefPubMed

18.

Guy R, Wand H, Knight V, Kenigsberg A, Read P, McNulty AM. SMS reminders improve re-screening in women and heterosexual men with chlamydia infection at Sydney Sexual Health Centre: a before-and-after study. Sex Transm Infect. 2013;89(1):11–5.CrossRefPubMed

19.

Bourne C, Knight V, Guy R, Wand H, Lu H, McNulty A. Short message service reminder intervention doubles sexually transmitted infection/HIV re-testing rates among men who have sex with men. Sex Transm Infect. 2011;87(3):229–31.CrossRefPubMed

20.

Zou H, Fairley CK, Guy R, Bilardi J, Bradshaw CS, Garland SM, et al. Automated, computer generated reminders and increased detection of gonorrhoea, chlamydia and syphilis in men who have sex with men. PLoS One. 2013;8(4):e61972.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

21.

Cook RL, Ostergaard L, Hillier SL, Murray PJ, Chang CC, Comer DM, et al. Home screening for sexually transmitted diseases in high-risk young women: randomised controlled trial. Sex Transm Infect. 2007;83(4):286–91.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

22.

Paneth-Pollak R, Klingler EJ, Blank S, Schillinger JA. The elephant never forgets; piloting a chlamydia and gonorrhea retesting reminder postcard in an STD clinic setting. Sex Transm Dis. 2010;37(6):365–8.PubMed

23.

Kohn R, Reynolds A, Snell A, Marcus J, Philip S. New reminder system does not improve Chlamydia re-screening rate. Atlanta: National STD Prevention Conference; 2010.

24.

Downing SG, Cashman C, McNamee H, Penney D, Russell DB, Hellard ME. Increasing chlamydia test of re-infection rates using SMS reminders and incentives. Sex Transm Infect. 2013;89(1):16–9.CrossRefPubMed

25.

Sparks R, Helmers JR, Handsfield HH, Totten PA, Holmes KK, Wroblewski JK, et al. Rescreening for gonorrhea and chlamydial infection through the mail: a randomized trial. Sex Transm Dis. 2004;31(2):113–6.CrossRefPubMed

26.

Smith KS, Hocking JS, Chen M, Fairley CK, McNulty A, Read P, et al. Rationale and design of REACT: a randomised controlled trial assessing the effectiveness of home-collection to increase chlamydia retesting and detect repeat positive tests. BMC Infect Dis. 2014;14:223.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

27.

Smith KS, Hocking JS, Chen MY, Fairley CK, McNulty AM, Read P, et al. Dual Intervention to Increase Chlamydia Retesting. Am J Prev Med. 2015;49(1):1–11.CrossRefPubMed

28.

Graseck AS, Shih SL, Peipert JF. Home versus clinic-based specimen collection for Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae. Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther. 2011;9(2):183–94.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

29.

Reagan MM, Xu H, Shih SL, Secura GM, Peipert JF. A randomized trial of home versus clinic-based STD screening among men. Sex Transm Dis. 2012;39(11):842–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

30.

Götz HM, Veldhuijzen IK, van Bergen JEAM, Hoebe CJPA, de Zwart O, Richardus JH, et al. Acceptability and consequences of screening for Chlamydia trachomatis by home-based urine testing. Sex Transm Dis. 2005;32(9):557–62.CrossRefPubMed

31.

Sacks-Davis R, Gold J, Aitken CK, Hellard ME. Home-based chlamydia testing of young people attending a music festival--who will pee and post? BMC Public Health. 2010;10:376.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

32.

Smith KJ, Cook RL, Ness RB. Cost comparisons between home- and clinic-based testing for sexually transmitted diseases in high-risk young women. Infect Dis Obstet Gynecol. 2007;2007:62467.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Title: The acceptability and cost of a home-based chlamydia retesting strategy: findings from the REACT randomised controlled trial
Authors: K. S. Smith
J. M. Kaldor
J. S. Hocking
M. S. Jamil
A. M. McNulty
P. Read
C. S. Bradshaw
M. Y. Chen
C. K. Fairley
H. Wand
K. Worthington
S. Blake
V. Knight
W. Rawlinson
M. Saville
S. N. Tabrizi
S. M. Garland
B. Donovan
R. Guy
Publication date: 01-12-2015
Publisher: BioMed Central
Published in: BMC Public Health / Issue 1/2016
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2458
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-016-2727-4

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

Springer Medicine

The acceptability and cost of a home-based chlamydia retesting strategy: findings from the REACT randomised controlled trial

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Trial registration

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Trial registration

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2016

Australian, Irish and Swedish women’s perceptions of what assisted them to breastfeed for six months: exploratory design using critical incident technique

Comparison of under-five mortality for 2000, 2005 and 2011 surveys in Ethiopia

Use of theory in computer-based interventions to reduce alcohol use among adolescents and young adults: a systematic review

Did the English strategy reduce inequalities in health? A difference-in-difference analysis comparing England with three other European countries

Testing the price and affordability of healthy and current (unhealthy) diets and the potential impacts of policy change in Australia

A randomized controlled trial for families with preschool children - promoting healthy eating and active playtime by connecting to nature