Cargando…
Self-sampling strategies (with/without digital innovations) in populations at risk of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae: a systematic review and meta-analyses
BACKGROUND: Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) and Neisseria gonorrhoeae (GC) resulted in over 200 million new sexually transmitted infections last year. Self-sampling strategies alone or combined with digital innovations (ie, online, mobile or computing technologies supporting self-sampling) could improve...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10447399/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36990696 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/sextrans-2022-055557 |
_version_ | 1785094543232729088 |
---|---|
author | Vialard, Fiorella Anand, Apoorva Leung Soo, Cindy de Waal, Anna McGuire, Madison Carmona, Sergio Fernández-Suárez, Marta Zwerling, Alice Anne Pant Pai, Nitika |
author_facet | Vialard, Fiorella Anand, Apoorva Leung Soo, Cindy de Waal, Anna McGuire, Madison Carmona, Sergio Fernández-Suárez, Marta Zwerling, Alice Anne Pant Pai, Nitika |
author_sort | Vialard, Fiorella |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) and Neisseria gonorrhoeae (GC) resulted in over 200 million new sexually transmitted infections last year. Self-sampling strategies alone or combined with digital innovations (ie, online, mobile or computing technologies supporting self-sampling) could improve screening methods. Evidence on all outcomes has not yet been synthesised, so we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to address this limitation. METHODS: We searched three databases (period: 1 January 2000–6 January 2023) for reports on self-sampling for CT/GC testing. Outcomes considered for inclusion were: accuracy, feasibility, patient-centred and impact (ie, changes in linkage to care, first-time testers, uptake, turnaround time or referrals attributable to self-sampling). We used bivariate regression models to meta-analyse accuracy measures from self-sampled CT/GC tests and obtain pooled sensitivity/specificity estimates. We assessed quality with Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool-2, Newcastle–Ottawa Scale and Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool. RESULTS: We summarised results from 45 studies reporting self-sampling alone (73.3%; 33 of 45) or combined with digital innovations (26.7%; 12 of 45) conducted in 10 high-income (HICs; n=34) and 8 low/middle-income countries (LMICs; n=11). 95.6% (43 of 45) were observational, while 4.4% (2 of 45) were randomised clinical trials. We noted that pooled sensitivity (n=13) for CT/GC was higher in extragenital self-sampling (>91.6% (86.0%–95.1%)) than in vaginal self-sampling (79.6% (62.1%–90.3%)), while pooled specificity remained high (>99.0% (98.2%–99.5%)). Participants found self-sampling highly acceptable (80.0%–100.0%; n=24), but preference varied (23.1%–83.0%; n=16). Self-sampling reached 51.0%–70.0% (n=3) of first-time testers and resulted in 89.0%–100.0% (n=3) linkages to care. Digital innovations led to 65.0%–92% engagement and 43.8%–57.1% kit return rates (n=3). Quality of studies varied. DISCUSSION: Self-sampling had mixed sensitivity, reached first-time testers and was accepted with high linkages to care. We recommend self-sampling for CT/GC in HICs but additional evaluations in LMICs. Digital innovations impacted engagement and may reduce disease burden in hard-to-reach populations. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021262950. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10447399 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-104473992023-08-25 Self-sampling strategies (with/without digital innovations) in populations at risk of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae: a systematic review and meta-analyses Vialard, Fiorella Anand, Apoorva Leung Soo, Cindy de Waal, Anna McGuire, Madison Carmona, Sergio Fernández-Suárez, Marta Zwerling, Alice Anne Pant Pai, Nitika Sex Transm Infect Systematic Review BACKGROUND: Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) and Neisseria gonorrhoeae (GC) resulted in over 200 million new sexually transmitted infections last year. Self-sampling strategies alone or combined with digital innovations (ie, online, mobile or computing technologies supporting self-sampling) could improve screening methods. Evidence on all outcomes has not yet been synthesised, so we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to address this limitation. METHODS: We searched three databases (period: 1 January 2000–6 January 2023) for reports on self-sampling for CT/GC testing. Outcomes considered for inclusion were: accuracy, feasibility, patient-centred and impact (ie, changes in linkage to care, first-time testers, uptake, turnaround time or referrals attributable to self-sampling). We used bivariate regression models to meta-analyse accuracy measures from self-sampled CT/GC tests and obtain pooled sensitivity/specificity estimates. We assessed quality with Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool-2, Newcastle–Ottawa Scale and Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool. RESULTS: We summarised results from 45 studies reporting self-sampling alone (73.3%; 33 of 45) or combined with digital innovations (26.7%; 12 of 45) conducted in 10 high-income (HICs; n=34) and 8 low/middle-income countries (LMICs; n=11). 95.6% (43 of 45) were observational, while 4.4% (2 of 45) were randomised clinical trials. We noted that pooled sensitivity (n=13) for CT/GC was higher in extragenital self-sampling (>91.6% (86.0%–95.1%)) than in vaginal self-sampling (79.6% (62.1%–90.3%)), while pooled specificity remained high (>99.0% (98.2%–99.5%)). Participants found self-sampling highly acceptable (80.0%–100.0%; n=24), but preference varied (23.1%–83.0%; n=16). Self-sampling reached 51.0%–70.0% (n=3) of first-time testers and resulted in 89.0%–100.0% (n=3) linkages to care. Digital innovations led to 65.0%–92% engagement and 43.8%–57.1% kit return rates (n=3). Quality of studies varied. DISCUSSION: Self-sampling had mixed sensitivity, reached first-time testers and was accepted with high linkages to care. We recommend self-sampling for CT/GC in HICs but additional evaluations in LMICs. Digital innovations impacted engagement and may reduce disease burden in hard-to-reach populations. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021262950. BMJ Publishing Group 2023-09 2023-03-29 /pmc/articles/PMC10447399/ /pubmed/36990696 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/sextrans-2022-055557 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Systematic Review Vialard, Fiorella Anand, Apoorva Leung Soo, Cindy de Waal, Anna McGuire, Madison Carmona, Sergio Fernández-Suárez, Marta Zwerling, Alice Anne Pant Pai, Nitika Self-sampling strategies (with/without digital innovations) in populations at risk of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae: a systematic review and meta-analyses |
title | Self-sampling strategies (with/without digital innovations) in populations at risk of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae: a systematic review and meta-analyses |
title_full | Self-sampling strategies (with/without digital innovations) in populations at risk of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae: a systematic review and meta-analyses |
title_fullStr | Self-sampling strategies (with/without digital innovations) in populations at risk of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae: a systematic review and meta-analyses |
title_full_unstemmed | Self-sampling strategies (with/without digital innovations) in populations at risk of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae: a systematic review and meta-analyses |
title_short | Self-sampling strategies (with/without digital innovations) in populations at risk of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae: a systematic review and meta-analyses |
title_sort | self-sampling strategies (with/without digital innovations) in populations at risk of chlamydia trachomatis and neisseria gonorrhoeae: a systematic review and meta-analyses |
topic | Systematic Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10447399/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36990696 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/sextrans-2022-055557 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT vialardfiorella selfsamplingstrategieswithwithoutdigitalinnovationsinpopulationsatriskofchlamydiatrachomatisandneisseriagonorrhoeaeasystematicreviewandmetaanalyses AT anandapoorva selfsamplingstrategieswithwithoutdigitalinnovationsinpopulationsatriskofchlamydiatrachomatisandneisseriagonorrhoeaeasystematicreviewandmetaanalyses AT leungsoocindy selfsamplingstrategieswithwithoutdigitalinnovationsinpopulationsatriskofchlamydiatrachomatisandneisseriagonorrhoeaeasystematicreviewandmetaanalyses AT dewaalanna selfsamplingstrategieswithwithoutdigitalinnovationsinpopulationsatriskofchlamydiatrachomatisandneisseriagonorrhoeaeasystematicreviewandmetaanalyses AT mcguiremadison selfsamplingstrategieswithwithoutdigitalinnovationsinpopulationsatriskofchlamydiatrachomatisandneisseriagonorrhoeaeasystematicreviewandmetaanalyses AT carmonasergio selfsamplingstrategieswithwithoutdigitalinnovationsinpopulationsatriskofchlamydiatrachomatisandneisseriagonorrhoeaeasystematicreviewandmetaanalyses AT fernandezsuarezmarta selfsamplingstrategieswithwithoutdigitalinnovationsinpopulationsatriskofchlamydiatrachomatisandneisseriagonorrhoeaeasystematicreviewandmetaanalyses AT zwerlingaliceanne selfsamplingstrategieswithwithoutdigitalinnovationsinpopulationsatriskofchlamydiatrachomatisandneisseriagonorrhoeaeasystematicreviewandmetaanalyses AT pantpainitika selfsamplingstrategieswithwithoutdigitalinnovationsinpopulationsatriskofchlamydiatrachomatisandneisseriagonorrhoeaeasystematicreviewandmetaanalyses |