Abstract
Abstract
Background
Community-based screening may be one solution to increase testing and treatment of sexually transmitted infections in sexually active teenagers, but there are few data on the practicalities and cost of running such a service. We estimate the cost of running a ‘Test n Treat’ service providing rapid chlamydia (CT) and gonorrhoea (NG) testing and same day on-site CT treatment in technical colleges.
Methods
Process data from a 2016/17 cluster randomised feasibility trial were used to estimate total costs and service uptake. Pathway mapping was used to model different uptake scenarios. Participants, from six London colleges, provided self-taken genitourinary samples in the nearest toilet. Included in the study were 509 sexually active students (mean 85/college): median age 17.9 years, 49% male, 50% black ethnicity, with a baseline CT and NG prevalence of 6 and 0.5%, respectively. All participants received information about CT and NG infections at recruitment. When the Test n Treat team visited, participants were texted/emailed invitations to attend for confidential testing. Three colleges were randomly allocated the intervention, to host (non-incentivised) Test n Treat one and four months after baseline. All six colleges hosted follow-up Test n Treat seven months after baseline when students received a £10 incentive (to participate).
Results
The mean non-incentivised daily uptake per college was 5 students (range 1 to 17), which cost £237 (range £1082 to £88) per student screened, and £4657 (range £21,281 to £1723) per CT infection detected, or £13,970 (range £63,842 to £5169) per NG infection detected.
The mean incentivised daily uptake was 19 students which cost £91 per student screened, and £1408/CT infection or £7042/NG infection detected.
If daily capacity for screening were achieved (49 students/day), costs including incentives would be £47 per person screened and £925/CT infection or £2774/NG infection detected.
Conclusions
Delivering non-incentivised Test n Treat in technical colleges is more expensive per person screened than CT and NG screening in clinics. Targeting areas with high infection rates, combined with high, incentivised uptake could make costs comparable.
Trial registration
ISRCTN58038795, Assigned August 2016, registered prospectively.
Funder
Research for Patient Benefit Programme
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference23 articles.
1. Public Health England. Infection Report - Sexually Transmitted Infections and Chlamydia Screening in England, 2015. Health Prot Rep [Internet]. 2016;10(22) Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/534601/hpr2216_stis.pdf.
2. Low N, Egger M, Sterne JAC, Harbord RM, Ibrahim F, Lindblom B, et al. Incidence of severe reproductive tract complications associated with diagnosed genital chlamydial infection: the Uppsala Women’s cohort study. Sex Transm Infect. 2006;82(3):212–8.
3. Allaire AD, Huddleston JF, Graves WL, Nathan L. Initial and repeat screening for chlamydia trachomatis during pregnancy. Infect Dis Obstet Gynecol. 1998;6(3):116–22.
4. World Health Organization Collaborating Centre for STD and HIV. Antimicrobial resistance in Neisseria gonorrhoeae. 2001. Sydney, Australia. www.who.int/csr/resources/publications/drugresist/Neisseria_gonorrhoeae.pdf [last accessed 13/03/2019].
5. Kerry-Barnard S, Fleming C, Reid F, Phillips R, Drennan VM, Adams EJ, et al. Test n Treat (TnT)’– Rapid testing and same-day, on-site treatment to reduce rates of chlamydia in sexually active further education college students: study protocol for a cluster randomised feasibility trial. Trials. 2018;19(1):311.
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献