Cargando…

Effectiveness of yearly, register based screening for chlamydia in the Netherlands: controlled trial with randomised stepped wedge implementation

Objective To evaluate the effectiveness of register based, yearly chlamydia screening. Design Controlled trial with randomised stepped wedge implementation in three blocks. Setting Three regions of the Netherlands: Amsterdam, Rotterdam, and South Limburg. Participants 317 304 women and men aged 16-2...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: van den Broek, Ingrid V F, van Bergen, Jan E A M, Brouwers, Elfi E H G, Fennema, Johannes S A, Götz, Hannelore M, Hoebe, Christian J P A, Koekenbier, Rik H, Kretzschmar, Mirjam, Over, Eelco A B, Schmid, Boris V, Pars, Lydia L, van Ravesteijn, Sander M, van der Sande, Marianne A B, de Wit, G Ardine, Low, Nicola, Op de Coul, Eline L M
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3390168/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22767614
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.e4316
_version_ 1782237411600760832
author van den Broek, Ingrid V F
van Bergen, Jan E A M
Brouwers, Elfi E H G
Fennema, Johannes S A
Götz, Hannelore M
Hoebe, Christian J P A
Koekenbier, Rik H
Kretzschmar, Mirjam
Over, Eelco A B
Schmid, Boris V
Pars, Lydia L
van Ravesteijn, Sander M
van der Sande, Marianne A B
de Wit, G Ardine
Low, Nicola
Op de Coul, Eline L M
author_facet van den Broek, Ingrid V F
van Bergen, Jan E A M
Brouwers, Elfi E H G
Fennema, Johannes S A
Götz, Hannelore M
Hoebe, Christian J P A
Koekenbier, Rik H
Kretzschmar, Mirjam
Over, Eelco A B
Schmid, Boris V
Pars, Lydia L
van Ravesteijn, Sander M
van der Sande, Marianne A B
de Wit, G Ardine
Low, Nicola
Op de Coul, Eline L M
author_sort van den Broek, Ingrid V F
collection PubMed
description Objective To evaluate the effectiveness of register based, yearly chlamydia screening. Design Controlled trial with randomised stepped wedge implementation in three blocks. Setting Three regions of the Netherlands: Amsterdam, Rotterdam, and South Limburg. Participants 317 304 women and men aged 16-29 years listed on municipal registers at start of trial. Intervention From March 2008 to February 2011, the Chlamydia Screening Implementation programme offered yearly chlamydia screening tests. Postal invitations asked people to use an internet site to request a kit for self collection of samples, which would then be sent to regional laboratories for testing. Treatment and partner notification were done by the general practitioner or at a sexually transmitted infection clinic. Main outcome measures Primary outcomes were the percentage of chlamydia tests positive (positivity), percentage of invitees returning a specimen (uptake), and estimated chlamydia prevalence. Secondary outcomes were positivity according to sex, age, region, and sociodemographic factors; adherence to screening invitations; and incidence of self reported pelvic inflammatory disease. Results The participation rate was 16.1% (43 358/269 273) after the first invitation, 10.8% after the second, and 9.5% after the third, compared with 13.0% (6223/48 031) in the control block invited at the end of round two of the intervention. Chlamydia positivity in the intervention blocks at the first invitation was the same as in the control block (4.3%) and 0.2% lower at the third invitation (odds ratio 0.96 (95% confidence interval 0.83 to 1.10)). No substantial decreases in positivity were seen after three screening rounds in any region or sociodemographic group. Among the people who participated three times (2.8% of all invitees), positivity fell from 5.9% to 2.9% (odds ratio 0.49 (0.47 to 0.50)). Conclusions There was no statistical evidence of an impact on chlamydia positivity rates or estimated population prevalence from the Chlamydia Screening Implementation programme after three years at the participation levels obtained. The current evidence does not support a national roll out of this register based chlamydia screening programme. Trial registration NTR 3071 (Netherlands Trial Register, www.trialregister.nl).
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3390168
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-33901682012-07-10 Effectiveness of yearly, register based screening for chlamydia in the Netherlands: controlled trial with randomised stepped wedge implementation van den Broek, Ingrid V F van Bergen, Jan E A M Brouwers, Elfi E H G Fennema, Johannes S A Götz, Hannelore M Hoebe, Christian J P A Koekenbier, Rik H Kretzschmar, Mirjam Over, Eelco A B Schmid, Boris V Pars, Lydia L van Ravesteijn, Sander M van der Sande, Marianne A B de Wit, G Ardine Low, Nicola Op de Coul, Eline L M BMJ Research Objective To evaluate the effectiveness of register based, yearly chlamydia screening. Design Controlled trial with randomised stepped wedge implementation in three blocks. Setting Three regions of the Netherlands: Amsterdam, Rotterdam, and South Limburg. Participants 317 304 women and men aged 16-29 years listed on municipal registers at start of trial. Intervention From March 2008 to February 2011, the Chlamydia Screening Implementation programme offered yearly chlamydia screening tests. Postal invitations asked people to use an internet site to request a kit for self collection of samples, which would then be sent to regional laboratories for testing. Treatment and partner notification were done by the general practitioner or at a sexually transmitted infection clinic. Main outcome measures Primary outcomes were the percentage of chlamydia tests positive (positivity), percentage of invitees returning a specimen (uptake), and estimated chlamydia prevalence. Secondary outcomes were positivity according to sex, age, region, and sociodemographic factors; adherence to screening invitations; and incidence of self reported pelvic inflammatory disease. Results The participation rate was 16.1% (43 358/269 273) after the first invitation, 10.8% after the second, and 9.5% after the third, compared with 13.0% (6223/48 031) in the control block invited at the end of round two of the intervention. Chlamydia positivity in the intervention blocks at the first invitation was the same as in the control block (4.3%) and 0.2% lower at the third invitation (odds ratio 0.96 (95% confidence interval 0.83 to 1.10)). No substantial decreases in positivity were seen after three screening rounds in any region or sociodemographic group. Among the people who participated three times (2.8% of all invitees), positivity fell from 5.9% to 2.9% (odds ratio 0.49 (0.47 to 0.50)). Conclusions There was no statistical evidence of an impact on chlamydia positivity rates or estimated population prevalence from the Chlamydia Screening Implementation programme after three years at the participation levels obtained. The current evidence does not support a national roll out of this register based chlamydia screening programme. Trial registration NTR 3071 (Netherlands Trial Register, www.trialregister.nl). BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. 2012-07-05 /pmc/articles/PMC3390168/ /pubmed/22767614 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.e4316 Text en © van den Broek et al 2012 This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial License, which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non commercial and is otherwise in compliance with the license. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/ and http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/legalcode.
spellingShingle Research
van den Broek, Ingrid V F
van Bergen, Jan E A M
Brouwers, Elfi E H G
Fennema, Johannes S A
Götz, Hannelore M
Hoebe, Christian J P A
Koekenbier, Rik H
Kretzschmar, Mirjam
Over, Eelco A B
Schmid, Boris V
Pars, Lydia L
van Ravesteijn, Sander M
van der Sande, Marianne A B
de Wit, G Ardine
Low, Nicola
Op de Coul, Eline L M
Effectiveness of yearly, register based screening for chlamydia in the Netherlands: controlled trial with randomised stepped wedge implementation
title Effectiveness of yearly, register based screening for chlamydia in the Netherlands: controlled trial with randomised stepped wedge implementation
title_full Effectiveness of yearly, register based screening for chlamydia in the Netherlands: controlled trial with randomised stepped wedge implementation
title_fullStr Effectiveness of yearly, register based screening for chlamydia in the Netherlands: controlled trial with randomised stepped wedge implementation
title_full_unstemmed Effectiveness of yearly, register based screening for chlamydia in the Netherlands: controlled trial with randomised stepped wedge implementation
title_short Effectiveness of yearly, register based screening for chlamydia in the Netherlands: controlled trial with randomised stepped wedge implementation
title_sort effectiveness of yearly, register based screening for chlamydia in the netherlands: controlled trial with randomised stepped wedge implementation
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3390168/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22767614
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.e4316
work_keys_str_mv AT vandenbroekingridvf effectivenessofyearlyregisterbasedscreeningforchlamydiainthenetherlandscontrolledtrialwithrandomisedsteppedwedgeimplementation
AT vanbergenjaneam effectivenessofyearlyregisterbasedscreeningforchlamydiainthenetherlandscontrolledtrialwithrandomisedsteppedwedgeimplementation
AT brouwerselfiehg effectivenessofyearlyregisterbasedscreeningforchlamydiainthenetherlandscontrolledtrialwithrandomisedsteppedwedgeimplementation
AT fennemajohannessa effectivenessofyearlyregisterbasedscreeningforchlamydiainthenetherlandscontrolledtrialwithrandomisedsteppedwedgeimplementation
AT gotzhannelorem effectivenessofyearlyregisterbasedscreeningforchlamydiainthenetherlandscontrolledtrialwithrandomisedsteppedwedgeimplementation
AT hoebechristianjpa effectivenessofyearlyregisterbasedscreeningforchlamydiainthenetherlandscontrolledtrialwithrandomisedsteppedwedgeimplementation
AT koekenbierrikh effectivenessofyearlyregisterbasedscreeningforchlamydiainthenetherlandscontrolledtrialwithrandomisedsteppedwedgeimplementation
AT kretzschmarmirjam effectivenessofyearlyregisterbasedscreeningforchlamydiainthenetherlandscontrolledtrialwithrandomisedsteppedwedgeimplementation
AT overeelcoab effectivenessofyearlyregisterbasedscreeningforchlamydiainthenetherlandscontrolledtrialwithrandomisedsteppedwedgeimplementation
AT schmidborisv effectivenessofyearlyregisterbasedscreeningforchlamydiainthenetherlandscontrolledtrialwithrandomisedsteppedwedgeimplementation
AT parslydial effectivenessofyearlyregisterbasedscreeningforchlamydiainthenetherlandscontrolledtrialwithrandomisedsteppedwedgeimplementation
AT vanravesteijnsanderm effectivenessofyearlyregisterbasedscreeningforchlamydiainthenetherlandscontrolledtrialwithrandomisedsteppedwedgeimplementation
AT vandersandemarianneab effectivenessofyearlyregisterbasedscreeningforchlamydiainthenetherlandscontrolledtrialwithrandomisedsteppedwedgeimplementation
AT dewitgardine effectivenessofyearlyregisterbasedscreeningforchlamydiainthenetherlandscontrolledtrialwithrandomisedsteppedwedgeimplementation
AT lownicola effectivenessofyearlyregisterbasedscreeningforchlamydiainthenetherlandscontrolledtrialwithrandomisedsteppedwedgeimplementation
AT opdecoulelinelm effectivenessofyearlyregisterbasedscreeningforchlamydiainthenetherlandscontrolledtrialwithrandomisedsteppedwedgeimplementation