Developing and testing accelerated partner therapy for partner notification for people with genital<i>Chlamydia trachomatis</i>diagnosed in primary care: a pilot randomised controlled trial

Estcourt, Claudia; Sutcliffe, L; Copas, Andrew; Mercer, Catherine H; Roberts, Tracy; Jackson, Louise; Symonds, Merle; Tickle, L; Muniina, Pamela; Rait, Greta; Johnson, Anne M; Aderogba, Kazeem; Creighton, Sarah M.; Cassell, Jackie A

doi:10.1136/sextrans-2014-051994

Cited by 34 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A second APT trial just published in which patients were randomized to hotline, pharmacy contact, or standard patient referral found no significant differences in the proportions of partners treated. 49 …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Partner Services in Sexually Transmitted Disease Prevention Programs

Hogben¹,

Collins²,

Hoots³

et al. 2016

Sexually Transmitted Diseases

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Partner services have been a mainstay of public health sexually transmitted disease (STD) prevention programs for decades. The principal goals are to interrupt transmission and reduce STD morbidity and sequelae. In this paper, we review current literature with the goal of informing STD prevention programs. Methods We searched the literature for systematic reviews. We found nine reviews published between 2005 and 2014 (covering 108 studies). The reviews varied by study inclusion criteria (e.g., study methods, geographic location, infections). We abstracted major conclusions and recommendations from the reviews. Results Conclusions and recommendations were divided into patient referral interventions and provider referral interventions. For patient referral, there was evidence supporting the use of expedited partner therapy and interactive counseling, but not purely didactic instruction. Provider referral through Disease Intervention Specialists was efficacious and particularly well-supported for HIV. For other studies, modeling data and testing outcomes showed that partner notification in general reached high-prevalence populations. Reviews also suggested more focus on using technology and population-level implementation strategies. However, partner services may not be the most efficient means to reach infected persons. Conclusions Partner services programs constitute a large proportion of program STD prevention activities. Value is maximized by balancing a portfolio of patient and provider referral interventions and by blending partner notification interventions with other STD prevention interventions in overall partner services program structure. STD prevention needs program-level research and development to generate this portfolio.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Partner Services in Sexually Transmitted Disease Prevention Programs

Hogben¹,

Collins²,

Hoots³

et al. 2016

Sexually Transmitted Diseases

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…9 In response, in January 2016, a workshop was held at CAPRISA. The goal of this workshop was to assemble key stakeholders involved in STI care or policy development to evaluate the current STI epidemic and care provision in KZN and to discuss the latest evidence for and against the transition to a diagnostic care model.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Advancing STI care in low/middle-income countries: has STI syndromic management reached its use-by date?

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…[27] In the UK, in a pilot RCT the proportion of partners treated after partner details (medical history and allergies) were communicated via the phone (35%) or at pharmacy (46%) did not exceed that by standard patient referral (45%). [18]…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[17] Also in the UK, EPT or similarly, Accelerated partner therapy (APT), is seen as a viable option. [18–20]…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Partner notification and partner treatment for chlamydia: attitude and practice of general practitioners in the Netherlands; a landscape analysis

Broek¹,

Donker

Hek

et al. 2017

BMC Fam Pract

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundChlamydia prevalence remains high despite scaling-up control efforts. Transmission is not effectively interrupted without partner notification (PN) and (timely) partner treatment (PT). In the Netherlands, the follow-up of partners is not standardized and may depend on GPs’ time and priorities. We investigated current practice and attitude of GPs towards PN and PT to determine the potential for Patient-Initiated Partner Treatment, which is legally not supported yet.MethodsMultiple data-sources were combined for a landscape analysis. Quantitative data on (potential) PT were obtained from prescriptions in the national pharmacy register (2004–2014) and electronic patient data from NIVEL-Primary Care Database (PCD) and from STI consultations in a subgroup of sentinel practices therein. Furthermore, we collected information on current practice via two short questionnaires at a national GP conference and obtained insight into GPs’ attitudes towards PN/PT in a vignette study among GPs partaking in NIVEL-PCD.ResultsPrescription data showed Azithromycin double dosages in 1–2% of cases in the pharmacy register (37.000 per year); probable chlamydia-specific repeated prescriptions or double dosages of other antibiotics in NIVEL-PCD (115/1078) could not be interpreted as PT for chlamydia with certainty. STI consultation data revealed direct PT in 6/100 cases, via partner prescription or double doses. In the questionnaires the large majority of GPs (>95% of 1411) reported to discuss PN of current and ex-partner(s) with chlamydia patients. Direct PT was indicated as most common method by 4% of 271 GPs overall and by 12% for partners registered in the same practice. Usually, GPs leave further steps to the patients (83%), advising patients to tell partners to get tested (56%) or treated (28%). In the vignette study, 16–20% of 268 GPs indicated willingness to provide direct PT, depending on patient/partner profile, more (24–45%) if patients would have the chance to notify their partner first.ConclusionGPs in the Netherlands already treat some partners of chlamydia cases directly, especially partners registered in the same practice. Follow-up of partner notification and treatment in general practice needs more attention. GPs may be open to implement PIPT more often, provided there are clear guidelines to arrange this legally and practically.

show abstract

Developing and testing accelerated partner therapy for partner notification for people with genitalChlamydia trachomatisdiagnosed in primary care: a pilot randomised controlled trial

Cited by 34 publications

References 22 publications

Partner Services in Sexually Transmitted Disease Prevention Programs

Partner Services in Sexually Transmitted Disease Prevention Programs

Advancing STI care in low/middle-income countries: has STI syndromic management reached its use-by date?

Partner notification and partner treatment for chlamydia: attitude and practice of general practitioners in the Netherlands; a landscape analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About